“Israel is a non-nuclear weapons state”

Ask an Awkward Question, Get a Silly Answer…


by Stuart Littlewood


Tired of listening to Agent Cameron and his foreign secretary William Hague trying to pick a fight with Iran and ratcheting up sanctions aimed at ruining that country’s economy and hurting innocent Iranian women and children, I asked my MP, Henry Bellingham, to table the following written Parliamentary Question (PQ)…

“Israel refuses (unlike Iran) to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and open its nuclear programme to international inspection. It has not signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. It has signed but not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, similarly the Chemical Weapons Convention. The Israeli regime continues to defy international law and UN resolutions with its illegal occupation, ongoing confiscation of Palestinian lands, destruction of homes, arrest and imprisonment of civilians, its inhuman blockade of Gaza and many other crimes against humanity – including lethal assaults on peaceful shipping on the high seas bringing humanitarian aid. Instead of rewarding Israel with pledges of everlasting protection and special trade agreements, should not Britain and the international community now discharge their obligation to make Israel accountable?”

Mr Bellingham said he would have to ‘tweak’ the question, presumably to fit the approved format. In the process the emphasis on Israel’s nuclear, biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction was mysteriously lost. This was the result…

Mr Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to encourage Israel to (a) sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and (b) open its nuclear programme to international inspection. [126611]

Alistair Burt: The British Government supports fully the universalisation of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT). We have called on Israel and other non-signatories to join the NPT as non-nuclear weapons states. We have also called on them to agree a full scope Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In 2009 the IAEA concluded that nuclear material, facilities or other items to which safeguards were applied in Israel remained in use for peaceful activities. The UK accepts these conclusions. We have a regular dialogue with the Israeli Government on civil nuclear and counter proliferation issues. [my italics]

What does Mr Burt, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, mean by including Israel among the “non-nuclear weapons states”? Is he seriously telling Parliament and the world that Israel has no nukes?

He sidesteps the taboo subject of Israel’s hundreds of nuclear warheads, which have never been subject to international safeguards, while he and his colleagues enjoy their sport of punishing Iran, which is properly signed up to the NPT and has no nuclear weapons.

Burt, being a former officer of the lobby group Conservative Friends of Israel, is a rabid admirer and supporter of that racist entity, as are Hague and Cameron. All three, according to theyworkforyou.com, voted “very strongly” for the Iraq war which, for the majority of the British public, was the acid test of how far they can be trusted in government.

My understanding of the Israeli nukes situation is that in 2009 the IAEA again called on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, open its nuclear facilities to inspection and place them under comprehensive IAEA safeguards. And again Israel declined.

The IAEA’s report ‘Israeli nuclear capabilities’ http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC54/GC54Documents/English/gc54-14_en.pdf states: “The IAEA applies safeguards in Israel pursuant to an INFCIRC/66-type safeguards agreement of 4 April 1975 concluded between the IAEA, Israel and the United States of America (INFCIRC/249) which was extended by a Protocol of 28 September 1977 (INFCIRC/249/Add.1). The Agreement relates to an agreement of 12 July 1955 on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy between the Governments of Israel and the USA. Israel has not concluded an Additional Protocol to its safeguards agreement.”

The Agency’s verification of Israel’s activities, unlike those of States with a comprehensive safeguards agreement, is limited to the materials, equipment and facilities Israel chooses to specify in its safeguards undertakings. The IAEA concluded in 2009 that the items specified by Israel were for peaceful purposes but made clear that it was unable to list all the nuclear facilities which could be subject of safeguards if a comprehensive agreement were in force.

Quite obviously, in the case of Israel the IAEA’s monitoring has been woefully insufficient. On 7 April 2010 the Director General wrote to all IAEA member states, including Israel, about a resolution adopted by the General Conference on 18 September 2009. The letter said the resolution expressed concern about Israeli nuclear capabilities and called on Israel “to accede to the NPT and place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards”. It also urged the IAEA Director General to work with the concerned States towards achieving that end and report on the implementation of this resolution to the Board of Governors and the General Conference.

Israel’s foreign minister Avigdor Liberman, in his response, called the resolution “politically motivated” and said it attempted to divert attention from the real proliferation challenges of the Middle East, namely non-compliance by Iran and Syria with their NPT obligations. According to him the resolution was incompatible with basic principles and norms of international law. “It is the sovereign right of any state to decide whether it consents to be bound by any particular treaty,” he wrote.

Imagine if Iran had said that…

While claiming that Israel values the non-proliferation regime and acknowledges its importance, Liberman said that “attempts to single out Israel… harm the professional standing of the IAEA” and that co-operation with the resolution was “unjustified”. He wanted it removed from the IAEA’s agenda.

Misleading Parliament is a serious offence. The Foreign Office minister ought to withdraw any suggestion that Israel has no nuclear weapons. I have asked Mr Bellingham to obtain a much fuller reply addressing the weapons issue. He says he will “see what further question can sensibly come out of this and table it in due course”.

A second PQ, asking why the British government hasn’t made friends and developed trade with Iran instead of declaring economic war and plotting a shooting war, seems to have gone missing.

It’s all so reminiscent of the unpleasantness in 1953 when Dr Mossadeq refused to do Britain’s bidding. Will we never learn?

Stuart Littlewood’s book Radio Free Palestine, with Foreword by Jeff Halper, can now be read on the internet by visiting: www.radiofreepalestine.org.uk

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on November 13, 2012, With Reads Filed under Veterans, World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

14 Responses to "“Israel is a non-nuclear weapons state”"

  1. nick dean  November 15, 2012 at 1:54 am

    Matthias Chang should be taken seriously. His view that the Israelis do not have nuclear weapons is worth considering especially if you are convinced that Jim Stone had Fukshima right – if they would do that to another country they would probably believe another country might do it to them.

  2. nick dean  November 15, 2012 at 1:51 am

    You people are shameless. Forget the Palestinians, Israel is really antisemitic, that’s its real crime and the Jews, the poor Jews are its biggest victims. Sure.

  3. LC  November 14, 2012 at 10:36 am

    Can’t you good guys do something about it???

  4. Oldpit  November 14, 2012 at 9:40 am

    JFK was killed because he opposed to a nuclear israel.
    After the shooting the jews kept going toward the nuke.

  5. daveshanks  November 14, 2012 at 7:39 am

    The regime in tel Aviv is the most anti-Jewish force for the last 60 years. As a Jew, i know how Israel and their agents in America – ADL, AIPAC and some low life sayanim help them draw so much nourishment from abusing the Jewish name.

  6. LC  November 14, 2012 at 6:43 am

    In the 60s & 70s also there were rumors that Iran had several U.S. nukes as deterrence against USSR. Even if any of such weapons existed then or now they would be useless without simple activation codes. So the Soviets may have also sold Iran chunks of junk (or real nukes) for high dollars but the stuff even if they are nukes can be completely useless because they can’t be activated since the only way to really test them is to explode one.!!!

  7. arthurborges  November 14, 2012 at 4:11 am

    Israel a non-nuclear power? Oh please! In the 1960s the generally accepted euphemism for the Dimona facility was “The Nail Factory”.

  8. woody  November 14, 2012 at 3:36 am

    Yes, Worker Bee, Iran might even have nukes from the crashed B-52 in 1991. But none of this is verified. In any event, Britain and the US shouldn’t have been so hostile to Iran in the 1950s and ever since. It’s been a massive, dumb-ass diplomatic failure.

  9. Warlord Moneybags  November 14, 2012 at 1:39 am

    The Samson Option is just bluster, more “why does everybody hate us, it must be because God loves us the most ?” crap.

    The more evil and cowardly you are, the more you fear your own death and whatever that encompasses.

    It’s time for all non-Zionists to collectively stand up to these insidious parasites and introduce the necessary reforms, but the US must take the lead, as they have done so recently in assisting the Zionist agenda.

    Ever seen a dog covered in ticks ?

    There is not a country on the planet which truly accepts Israel’s right to slaughter the Palestinians and steal their land.

    The ball is in our court… we must expose them wherever we find them… the tide is slowly but surely turning….

    I can feel it in my bones.

  10. Worker Bee  November 14, 2012 at 1:17 am

    I recall that Gordon Duff has written that Iran has several nuclear warheads manufactured in the former Soviet Union.

  11. LC  November 13, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    Mr. Littlewood:

    Thank you & Please take note of the correct definition of ISRAEL as established in previous pages of VT, that “ISRAEL IS A STATE OF TERRORISM” (ie: Israel is a form of terrorism) serving the Rothschilds against the rest of the world.

    And, apparently Iran’s nukes are also nothing but phony as I have never seen a single footage of their facilities with people wearing radiation protection outfits!!! Here is one of the latest films where they’re wearing hospital gowns & gloves. They must be handling one totally harmless form of uranium, may be an empty rod!!! If so, that means a dozen people got awfully rich with this hoax while Iran people got suckered into believing their country was using the billions for something useful while tollerating all the bulling from terrorists!!! *****http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34cjPsdfTV4&feature=related

    As previously explained if Iran is playing a Nuclear Hoax Program they must have learned these scams from NASA’s phony space programs like the Apollo LUNE-landings filmed in Hollywood by Stanley Kubrick +++

  12. ricohands  November 13, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    2 words: SAMSON OPTION

  13. draximus  November 13, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    If you think you’ve got things bad in the ‘States’ welcome to the UK and our bought and paid for Zionist politicians, most of whom were born without testicles… God knows who the fathers of their children are….

  14. Franklin Ryckaert  November 13, 2012 at 11:49 am

    By counting Israel as among the non-nuclear weapons states, Mr Bellingham goes further than Israel itself, which always has declared a policy of “ambiguity” about its nuclear arms. Is there not a special category of “ambiguous states”?

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

From Veterans Today Network