MISSILE DEFENSE & STAND-DOWN OF NUCLEAR DETERRENCE & EGYPT, SYRIA PRESS FOR IAEA RESOLUTION AGAINST ISRAEL:
by Emanuel A. Winston, Mid East Analyst & Commentator
This all happened before – at the Madrid Conference of 1981, October 29-November 3. This first International Conference “Kangaroo Court” was manipulated by James Baker III and his three Jewish employees: Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and Daniel Kurtzer. I speculated at the time (1981) that one of the participants of this arranged Conference would, in some way, rise up and accuse the Jewish State of Israel and demand that she stand down her alleged nuclear deterrence. Like well-rehearsed clockwork, the Egyptian delegate rose up to demand that the Middle East be made into a Nuclear-Free Zone, meaning that Israel was to give up any such deterrence she might have as her defense against 180 million hostile surrounding Arab Muslims.
Now, no doubt, James Baker is resurrecting the same call as follows.
Not surprisingly, it was Egypt and also Syria who was visited by the godfather of the Islamic Pakistani Nuclear Bomb, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan of Pakistan who passed on his nuclear technology and materials.
Their idea and necessity now is to take the focus off of North Korea, Syria and Iran who, no doubt, provided the funding for Syria’s venture into nuclear weapons.
MISSILE DEFENSE & STAND-DOWN OF NUCLEAR DETERRENCE
by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator April 5, 2005
As President George Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice inform Israel to stand down her nuclear deterrence – while at the same time asking Congress for a $9 Billion expenditure on nuclear missile defense in the 2006 U.S. Budget year. This is one of those “Do as I say, not as I do” directives by America to Israel.
Let us examine the motives of the Bush Family Dynasty and their adviser, James Baker III, the multinational oil corporations and the Arab Muslim nations.
Clearly, there is a certain synergism between all of the above and their mandate that Israel adopt the disarmament policy of South Africa when it gave up its nuclear arms and turned from a controlling White government to a mostly Black government with few skills in governance. White or Black, South Africa was NOT surrounded by dedicated enemies ready to exterminate its population.
Why would Bush, Rice, Baker and John Bolton want Israel to sacrifice her nuclear deterrence when the U.S. has already spent $92 Billion on Missile Defense since 1983 and wishes to spend $9 Billion more?
There is no doubt that the U.S. could be a target for incoming Nuclear Ballistic Missiles, possibly from North Korea, Iran – among others. However, since the U.S. is not likely to be targeted by their next-door neighbors Canada or Mexico, she is thousands of miles from these other adversaries.
Israel, on the other hand, is literally within minutes of flying time for incoming missiles and/or aircraft. While I point out the unfairness of the Bush policy, I am at the moment, more interested in their very suspicious motives.
I recall the 1981 Madrid Conference which Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir attended, although he was warned not to because it was clearly a State Department set-up. But, like most Israeli leaders, Shamir believed he could overcome.
Regrettably, Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, like all the Prime Ministers who followed him, never understood geo-politics nor the motives of the Europeans nor even Israel’s American friends. They did not understand that, to these nations, Israel was merely a pawn to be sacrificed at a time of their convenience and for their greater interests in oil.
During the Madrid Conference, I opined that Baker’s Jew-boys, Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and Daniel Kurtzer would get one of the attending Arab Muslim nations to make a declaration that the Middle East region should be a Nuclear-Free Zone. Egypt was the State chosen to make this declaration and she did.
This meant that the U.S. State Department and their Arab allies wanted Israel to rid herself of her Nuclear Deterrence. That would leave Israel vulnerable to face Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Jordan, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia with only conventional weapons. Most (if not all) of these hostile neighboring States have had their weapons’ systems built up by the U.S. with top-of-the-line, high tech weapons – both in quantity and in quality. Egypt, as a signatory to the Camp David Accords, has received $2 Billion a year in American tax-payers’ money – reaching a total of some $60 Billion since 1979. Also, Egypt has received free weapons’ systems and factories such as the turn-key factory to build M1A1 Abrams tanks, courtesy of then Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Egypt has become a military colossus in the Middle East on American dollars.
Egypt was the State Department’s (unofficial) spokesman at the 1981 Madrid Conference (and since) for a Middle East Nuclear Free Zone. That was aimed directly at Israel, the only M.E. State known to have nuclear weapons.
The U.S. State Department, of course, never wanted Israel, the Jewish State to exist and since her birth May 14, 1948, the State Department has done everything possible to weaken the Jewish State – while arming her enemies with the best America could offer in weapons. Israel was supposed to lose (any one) of the subsequent six wars the Arab Muslims initiated but – she didn’t – much to the annoyance of the State Department Arabists.
It is now April 2005. September 11, 2001 was first really big Arab Muslim attack on American soil. President George Bush declared a war against Global Terrorism. Bush attacked Afghanistan and Iraq – only to discover that Terror is a new kind of warfare. Cut off one head and 3 grow back.
Israel has been fighting against radical Muslim Terror-based warfare for some hundred years in terms of recorded history but, of course, hostile Islamic Terror ramped up considerably since Israel’s birth in 1948.
Oil has become very pricey and the Free Western nations are beginning to cozy up to Saudi Arabia – like a bunch of male dogs following female dog in heat. Anything the Saudis and Arab Muslims wanted, they got. They wanted Israel dead so the Arabists in America and Europe tried their very best to accommodate the oil-bearing Arab Muslims.
The Arabists had certain problems because the American people liked this spunky little Jewish State who kept kicking the stuffing out of Arab armies. So, while the pro-Arab State Department was wholly hostile and anti-Semitic to boot, they had to cover their subversion with diplomatese. In a word, they lied and pretended to be in line with the wishes of the American people. The State Department was, is and will continue to be an un-elected and therefore un-democratic “Shadow Government”.
Again, the question arises of why the Bush Family and cohorts want Israel to disarm her Nuclear Deterrence. One reason is that the President and the State Department knows when they start the dismemberment or re-partition of the Jewish State of Israel, the Arab nations will feel more confident in their ability to take out Israel in her reduced state of vulnerability.
They understand, if Iran and Syria, among others, decide to hit Israel with a saturation missile attack that Israel will use her second strike capability to take out many of the Arab Muslim cities and army installations in the hostile neighboring States which presently surround her.
The U.S. has its own vested interests and do not want that to happen – thus their demand that Israel eliminate her Nuclear Deterrence. For them, it is better that Israel disappear then lose large, profitable Arab Muslim markets and possibly the oil that goes with them.
While I realize that Sharon and Vice Prime Minister Shimon Peres can no longer be trusted to defend the Jewish nation, there is also the possibility that they will cave in to whatever threats the Bush family can bring to bear – including nuclear disarmament..
While George Bush recognizes the threat of nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles aimed at the U.S., he has discounted the same and even far worse dangers that Israel faces from her close hostile neighbors. I recall my sense of dark foreboding when Shimon Peres was in charge of Israel’s nuclear deterrence as a minister in the government. I felt certain he would find a way to subvert Israel’s readiness but, fortunately there were others standing guard. Now, we only have to worry about Arik Sharon being on a short leash to Bush.
Friendly nations become unfriendly when their interests, as they see them, are at stake. With oil prices hitting astronomical heights, selling out an ally is no stretch of the imagination.
[IN 2005] We saw Arik Sharon being invited to the Bush Neverland Ranch in Crawford, Texas to do to him what was done to then Prime Minister Menachem Begin at Camp David [and PM Yitzhak Shamir in 1981 at Madrid]. Sharon has already caved in to uprooting 9,000 Jewish men, women and children from their homes, farms, factories, businesses, schools, synagogues and even their cemeteries in Gush Katif and Northern Samaria. After the retreat from Gaza, expect all of Judea and Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and even Jerusalem to be next. Sharon will be pressured on the Golan and on Jerusalem. Since Sharon has no visible attachments to the Jewish religion, he will probably even cave in on Jerusalem.
I suspect the reason Bush chose his ranch for the meeting is that protestors cannot get anywhere near his ranch for TV crews to see the signs blasting Sharon for being a traitor to his own nation. By comparison, Mahmoud Abbas aka Abu Mazen is being invited to the royal treatment at the White House to lift his image – given that Terrorists really run the PLO
On Monday April 11th from 1-4 PM, there will be a large emergency rally not too far from President Bush’s Ranch in Crawford, Texas (at the Tonka Park), attended by Christians and Jews, protesting against Sharon and Bush selling off the Holy Land which was given by G-d to the Jews in perpetuity, to Islamo-fascists / radical fundamentalist Islamic Terrorists. This is probably where the media will also be “sequestered”.
Let us see if the Media covers this event or, as a ‘favor’ to Bush, if they ‘spike’ or black out coverage. (More on this to follow.)
Israeli & Global News
EGYPT, SYRIA PRESS FOR IAEA RESOLUTION AGAINST ISRAEL
Vienna, Sept 19 (AFP) Sep 19, 2007
Egypt and Syria urged the UN nuclear watchdog on Wednesday to pass a resolution condemning Israel for possessing nuclear weapons. Israel insisted there was no basis for the resolution, scheduled to be presented on Thursday, and called upon the other member states of the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to reject the proposal.
Egyptian ambassador Ihab Fawzy said the IAEA must pass the resolution against Israel to show it is committed to “the principles and declared stances regarding peace, stability and security in the Middle East region.”
Syrian ambassador Ibrahim Othman told the IAEA general conference that “Arab countries will with greater determination… present to this conference a draft resolution for its adoption.”
Israel’s policy is one of “nuclear ambiguity”, neither confirming nor denying it has nuclear weapons even if, in an apparent blunder, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appeared to imply late last year that his country does in fact have the bomb.
The Arab states insist, however, that the Jewish state does have such weapons and is a danger to peace and stability in the Middle East.
Traditionally at the IAEA’s general conference, Arab states introduce a resolution on the Israeli nuclear threat but in the face of strong Western opposition, they withdraw the text.
It is then postponed to the following year in return for Israel agreeing to a call for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
On Wednesday, however, the Egyptian and Syrian ambassadors signaled that their patience was wearing thin.
“The fact that many UN and IAEA resolutions with regard to Israel’s nuclear capabilities are not carried out increases the frustration of the Arab peoples and threatens an arms race that could also threaten the peace and security of the region and the world,” said Syrian ambassador Othman.
He complained that Israel was the only country in the Middle East “to have nuclear weapons and nuclear capabilities which are not under international control.”
It was therefore a legitimate concern “to ask Israel to join the other countries in the NPT” (the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty), Othman said.
The Jewish state’s steadfast refusal to put its nuclear facilities under international control constituted a “danger” to peace in the region and internationally, he argued.
Syria supports setting up a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East and “expresses its deep anxiety regarding the obstacle that Israel places to setting up such an area,” Othman said.
Israel’s “intransigent attitude has brought great harm to the credibility and the internationality of the NPT”, Othman said.
The chief of Israel’s atomic energy commission, Gideon Frank, rejected the criticism.
He said Israel remained committed “to a vision of the Middle East developing into a zone free of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.”
“Yet, in the Middle East… such a noble goal cannot be advanced out of context,” Frank argued.
A nuclear weapons-free zone could only emerge if there were “a fundamental transformation of the regional political-strategic environment through a gradual process of building mutual trust and reconciliation, followed by more modest arms control measures,” Frank said.
“So far, such a transformation has eluded the Middle East.”
Frank said that “many alarming proliferation developments in the Middle East have occurred in recent years. None of these involved Israel. But all of them challenge our security.”
There was “no basis” for the resolution against Israel. “Its sponsors are motivated by extraneous considerations,” he said.
