I must admit that I usually get a laugh, every time I happen to read the so-called ‘research’ articles on the website of America’s most powerful Jewish-controlled think tank, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). They’re, usually, nothing but Israeli HASBARA (propaganda) crap. The one I am going to address is an interview with another “expert on Middle Eastern Affairs”, Dr. Joseph S. Nye Jr. (Harvard University) – published one day before the P5+1 meeting with Iran’s nuclear officials on October 1, 2009. The title of the interview ‘The Right’ to Question Iran, shows the historical ignorance and political cunningness of CFR.
The good professor was quoted of the opinion that he doesn’t expect any major breakthroughs from the talks, Washington nonetheless has the responsiblity the push Iran to come clean. “If the Iranian develope nuclear weapons, there’s likely to be a chain of proliferation in the Middle East. This may make the prospect of nuclear weapons being used go up by a significant propability. We have a right, as do their neighbors, to try to pursuade them to forgo that.”
I bet the Professor cannot be so ignorant of the fact that Zionist entity had developed nuclear bombs over four decades ago and on several ocassion its leader had threatened to use them against its Arab neighbors. However, that did not start proliferation in the Middle East – though some of Arab neighbors did question the Israel’s right to develop them. Moreover, Washington, never used ‘The Right’ to Question Israel.
Interestingly, another American professor, Christopher Vasillopulos (Eastern Connecticut State University), has thrown eggs on CFR propaganda piece. Writing under the heading Obama and Palestine: Predictable disappointment, publish in Turkish daily “Today’s Zaman”:
Every time Obama or Hillary Clinton refer to the unacceptability of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, they refer to non-existent Iranian weapons and ignore hundreds of Israeli nuclear warheads. The American mantra reconfirmed by Obama-Clinton is “no nuclear weapons in the Middle East”. Who can disagree with this? Who want nuclear weapons in the Middle East or anywhere else for that matter? The difficulty with the American mantra could not be more simple or compelling. It is false in its premises and false in the facts. Americans have accepted nuclear weapons in the Middle East, so long as they are Israelis. And Israel had nuclear weapons for over thirty years, hundreds of war loads and missile capable of reaching every capital in the region. Every time an American official intones the mantra that “nuclear weapons are unacceptable in the region”, the hypocrisy bell clangs. Therefore, my critical indicator of change in American policy regarding Palestine is this: Would Obama say that all nuclear weapons in the Middle East are unacceptable, including those of Israel? So far there has been a resounding silence, except the hypocrisy bell. Clang! Clang!”
There is a much greater problem entailed in the mantra than a flagrant double standard. The very stability of the region, one of the principal objectives of American foreign policy, is being held hostage to this absurd mantra. So long as Israeli nuclear weapons are ignored, there can be no nuclear stability in the region. As every nuclear strategist knows, it is inherently unstable for only one adversary to have nuclear weapons. Nuclear deterrence, that is, nuclear stability, requires mutually assured destruction (MAD). This doctrine holds that stability requires that each nuclear power has the ability to retaliate effectively after the most devastating attack possible. This is called “second strike capability.” To be effective, it must inflict unacceptable damage to the nation which struck first. This has been the logic of nuclear stability ever since the Soviet Union developed its ability to strike the US. Its only assumption is the belief in the sanity of those who hold the nuclear triggers. Like it or not, precarious or not, MAD has worked. There is no reason to believe its fundamental logic no longer applies. It has applied regionally as well, as the case of India and Pakistan demonstrates.
Of course, the assumption of sanity is properly called into question by religious and other fanatics. No one wants such true believers to have control of nuclear weapons. “Aha! Therefore, we have to stop the Iranians!” The problem with this corollary of the American mantra is that it ignores Israeli fanatics, who are more firmly in control of Israel and its nuclear weapons than Islamic fundamentalists are in control of Iran and its non-existent nuclear weapons. No one doubts that Israel would use nuclear weapons on the Arabs, whether or not they have been attacked with such weapons. Everyone fears that Israel, rather than be defeated, would resort to nuclear Armageddon. Indeed this is one of the principal reasons that America does all it can to avoid an Israeli defeat. To the degree this is true, American foreign policy is held hostage to the existence of the Israeli monopoly of nuclear weapons, a fortiori, when Israel is controlled by right-wing fanatics, as is the current case…….
I am compelled to warn that the next time we hear Obama intone the mantra that “nuclear weapons in the Middle East are unacceptable,” we should hear more than the “clang! clang!” of hypocrisy. We should hear the bell sounding the knell of political rationality. And what will take its place, if not the irrational forces of hatred, bigotry, racism and fanaticism?