Nuclear Proliferation - When One Goes Nuclear, They All Go Nuclear
April 03, 2014 | Tom Olago
Share this article
The race towards nuclear armament or proliferation is on in earnest in the Middle East. The message from the director of the political-military affairs bureau at Israel’s Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. (Res.) Amos Gilad is summarized by the following statement: “When one goes nuclear, they all go nuclear…the Arabs will not tolerate the Persians having the bomb.”
In a report by osnetdaily.com, Gen. Gilad points out two nations likely to acquire nuclear weapons should Iran obtain the weapons it desires: Saudi Arabia who have reportedly already purchased nuclear weapons from Pakistan: according to a BBC report, as of November weapons had already been purchased and were ready to be transported.
Osnetdaily.com explains that the wholesale collapse of Saudi-U.S. relations, and the U.S. efforts to reconcile with Iran, have been game changers for Saudi Arabia. The U.S. backing of Saudi Arabia deterred Iran from gaining regional dominance. In recent years the U.S. has downscaled its military presence, doing all it can to establish a relationship with Iran—Saudi Arabia’s mortal enemy. Consequently, America is viewed by its old allies as “untrustworthy and treacherous,” hence Saudi Arabia feels it must take matters into its own hands to guarantee its safety. Hence the rush to nuclear proliferation.
The second power Gilad mentioned was Egypt: despite suffering the devastating economic setbacks of two coups, “The Egyptians have the resources, capability and know-how to achieve nuclear capabilities.”
Egypt’s nuclear program has developed over time to where it can now produce just over 13 pounds of plutonium per year. In an interview with The Blaze, one professor speculated that such a quantity would be enough to produce one bomb a year, and that Egypt has the capability to produce 24 nuclear warheads. And in the same way, Egypt has said it would only seek nuclear weapons if Iran did, so Iran’s nuclear drive may yet fuel a push for weapons by Egypt. Egypt’s predicament is similar to that of Saudi Arabia. America’s current foreign policy has reportedly shattered ties between Washington and the military-backed government in Cairo today.
With dwindling American support and influence, smaller, weaker Arab nations must fill the void. The nuclear option seems most viable—particularly for those nations that have the means to create or buy them quickly, then align themselves geopolitically in the ways most appropriate for each nation’s survival. Perhaps the only predictable outcome is that virtually all the Arab countries will be firmly against Israel and will be willing to temporarily shelve their differences in order to unite against her.
Another area of nuclear proliferation is likely to shift to other non-Arab countries that have learned the lessons from the recent Ukraine scenarios. Dr. Richard Land, writing in the Christian Post, explains that “…in 1991,when the Soviet Union disintegrated, the newly independent Ukraine (inheriting part of Moscow's nuclear arsenal), was for one brief moment the world's third leading nuclear power.
Ukraine had control of over 1,800 nuclear weapons, more than any nation but the U.S. and Russia. The Clinton Administration, rightly concerned about these weapons ending up in the hands of terrorists, made it a high priority to urge the Ukraine to give up its weapons in return for economic aid and security guarantees.
The Ukraine did so in return for the "Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" in which the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons and signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and Russia, Britain, and the U.S. pledged to protect Ukraine's "territorial integrity." This pledge has proven to be the emptiest of promises as the Russian aggression in Crimea and its threat to seize further Ukrainian territory illustrate vividly. Does anyone really think that if the Ukraine still possessed even a small portion of its former nuclear arsenal Crimea would now be "annexed" by Russia?”
Dr. Land sees the absence of the U.S as a kind of ‘globocop’ creating a protection vacuum outcome that precipitates a panic rush for nuclear armaments by countries that felt the U.S would continually protect or shield them from the “bullies with nuclear weapons” (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and sooner rather than later, Iran). .
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/April03/031.html#Y1QVJcCAswv0MkLU.99
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/April03/031.html#Y1QVJcCAswv0MkLU.99
April 03, 2014 | Tom Olago
Share this article
The race towards nuclear armament or proliferation is on in earnest in the Middle East. The message from the director of the political-military affairs bureau at Israel’s Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. (Res.) Amos Gilad is summarized by the following statement: “When one goes nuclear, they all go nuclear…the Arabs will not tolerate the Persians having the bomb.”
In a report by osnetdaily.com, Gen. Gilad points out two nations likely to acquire nuclear weapons should Iran obtain the weapons it desires: Saudi Arabia who have reportedly already purchased nuclear weapons from Pakistan: according to a BBC report, as of November weapons had already been purchased and were ready to be transported.
Osnetdaily.com explains that the wholesale collapse of Saudi-U.S. relations, and the U.S. efforts to reconcile with Iran, have been game changers for Saudi Arabia. The U.S. backing of Saudi Arabia deterred Iran from gaining regional dominance. In recent years the U.S. has downscaled its military presence, doing all it can to establish a relationship with Iran—Saudi Arabia’s mortal enemy. Consequently, America is viewed by its old allies as “untrustworthy and treacherous,” hence Saudi Arabia feels it must take matters into its own hands to guarantee its safety. Hence the rush to nuclear proliferation.
The second power Gilad mentioned was Egypt: despite suffering the devastating economic setbacks of two coups, “The Egyptians have the resources, capability and know-how to achieve nuclear capabilities.”
Egypt’s nuclear program has developed over time to where it can now produce just over 13 pounds of plutonium per year. In an interview with The Blaze, one professor speculated that such a quantity would be enough to produce one bomb a year, and that Egypt has the capability to produce 24 nuclear warheads. And in the same way, Egypt has said it would only seek nuclear weapons if Iran did, so Iran’s nuclear drive may yet fuel a push for weapons by Egypt. Egypt’s predicament is similar to that of Saudi Arabia. America’s current foreign policy has reportedly shattered ties between Washington and the military-backed government in Cairo today.
With dwindling American support and influence, smaller, weaker Arab nations must fill the void. The nuclear option seems most viable—particularly for those nations that have the means to create or buy them quickly, then align themselves geopolitically in the ways most appropriate for each nation’s survival. Perhaps the only predictable outcome is that virtually all the Arab countries will be firmly against Israel and will be willing to temporarily shelve their differences in order to unite against her.
Another area of nuclear proliferation is likely to shift to other non-Arab countries that have learned the lessons from the recent Ukraine scenarios. Dr. Richard Land, writing in the Christian Post, explains that “…in 1991,when the Soviet Union disintegrated, the newly independent Ukraine (inheriting part of Moscow's nuclear arsenal), was for one brief moment the world's third leading nuclear power.
Ukraine had control of over 1,800 nuclear weapons, more than any nation but the U.S. and Russia. The Clinton Administration, rightly concerned about these weapons ending up in the hands of terrorists, made it a high priority to urge the Ukraine to give up its weapons in return for economic aid and security guarantees.
The Ukraine did so in return for the "Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances" in which the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons and signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and Russia, Britain, and the U.S. pledged to protect Ukraine's "territorial integrity." This pledge has proven to be the emptiest of promises as the Russian aggression in Crimea and its threat to seize further Ukrainian territory illustrate vividly. Does anyone really think that if the Ukraine still possessed even a small portion of its former nuclear arsenal Crimea would now be "annexed" by Russia?”
Dr. Land sees the absence of the U.S as a kind of ‘globocop’ creating a protection vacuum outcome that precipitates a panic rush for nuclear armaments by countries that felt the U.S would continually protect or shield them from the “bullies with nuclear weapons” (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and sooner rather than later, Iran). .
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/April03/031.html#Y1QVJcCAswv0MkLU.99
Nuclear Proliferation
- When One Goes Nuclear, They All Go Nuclear
Share this article
The
race towards nuclear armament or proliferation is on in earnest in the
Middle East. The message from the director of the political-military
affairs bureau at Israel’s Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. (Res.) Amos Gilad
is summarized by the following statement: “When one goes nuclear, they
all go nuclear…the Arabs will not tolerate the Persians having the
bomb.”
In
a report by osnetdaily.com,
Gen. Gilad points out two nations likely to acquire nuclear weapons should
Iran obtain the weapons it desires: Saudi Arabia who have reportedly
already purchased nuclear weapons from Pakistan: according to a BBC
report, as of November weapons had already been purchased and were ready
to be transported.
Osnetdaily.com
explains that the wholesale collapse of Saudi-U.S. relations, and the U.S.
efforts to reconcile with Iran, have been game changers for Saudi Arabia.
The U.S. backing of Saudi Arabia deterred Iran from gaining regional
dominance. In recent years the U.S. has downscaled its military presence,
doing all it can to establish a relationship with Iran—Saudi Arabia’s
mortal enemy. Consequently, America is viewed by its old allies as
“untrustworthy and treacherous,” hence Saudi Arabia feels it must take
matters into its own hands to guarantee its safety. Hence the rush to
nuclear proliferation.
The
second power Gilad mentioned was Egypt: despite suffering the devastating
economic setbacks of two coups, “The Egyptians have the resources,
capability and know-how to achieve nuclear capabilities.”
Egypt’s
nuclear program has developed over time to where it can now produce just
over 13 pounds of plutonium per year. In an interview with The Blaze, one
professor speculated that such a quantity would be enough to produce one
bomb a year, and that Egypt has the capability to produce 24 nuclear
warheads. And in the same way, Egypt has said it would only seek nuclear
weapons if Iran did, so Iran’s nuclear drive may yet fuel a push for
weapons by Egypt. Egypt’s predicament is similar to that of Saudi
Arabia. America’s current foreign policy has reportedly shattered ties
between Washington and the military-backed government in Cairo today.
With
dwindling American support and influence, smaller, weaker Arab nations
must fill the void. The nuclear option seems most viable—particularly
for those nations that have the means to create or buy them quickly, then
align themselves geopolitically in the ways most appropriate for each
nation’s survival. Perhaps the only predictable outcome is that
virtually all the Arab countries will be firmly against Israel and will be
willing to temporarily shelve their differences in order to unite against
her.
Another
area of nuclear proliferation is likely to shift to other non-Arab
countries that have learned the lessons from the recent Ukraine scenarios.
Dr. Richard Land, writing in the Christian
Post,
explains that “…in 1991,when the Soviet Union disintegrated, the newly
independent Ukraine (inheriting part of Moscow's nuclear arsenal), was for
one brief moment the world's third leading nuclear power.
Ukraine
had control of over 1,800 nuclear weapons, more than any nation but the
U.S. and Russia. The Clinton Administration, rightly concerned about these
weapons ending up in the hands of terrorists, made it a high priority to
urge the Ukraine to give up its weapons in return for economic aid and
security guarantees.
The
Ukraine did so in return for the "Budapest Memorandum on Security
Assurances" in which the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons and
signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and Russia, Britain, and the
U.S. pledged to protect Ukraine's "territorial integrity." This
pledge has proven to be the emptiest of promises as the Russian aggression
in Crimea and its threat to seize further Ukrainian territory illustrate
vividly. Does anyone really think that if the Ukraine still possessed even
a small portion of its former nuclear arsenal Crimea would now be
"annexed" by Russia?”
Dr.
Land sees the absence of the U.S as a kind of ‘globocop’ creating a
protection vacuum outcome that precipitates a panic rush for nuclear
armaments by countries that felt the U.S would continually protect or
shield them from the “bullies with nuclear weapons” (Russia, China,
India, Pakistan, and sooner rather than later, Iran).
.
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/April03/031.html#Y1QVJcCAswv0MkLU.99
No comments:
Post a Comment