U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proposed a “nuclear arms free” Middle East at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference without mentioning Israel. She asked Iran to clarify its nuclear program, though we have heard several times from American officials that Iran has not achieved a nuclear weapon yet. Meanwhile, Israel possesses over a hundred nuclear warheads in its arsenal.
Tabnak news reports that the above has been published by Abd al-Bari Atwan, the editor of al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper. Today, he added, “Hillary Clinton has humiliated the Arab nations, and especially Egypt since Egypt was the first country to propose a ‘nuclear arms free Middle East’ for the next year, submitting a draft to the leaders of the 189 nations participating in the New York conference.
All of these speeches and diplomatic moves were, in fact, done to humiliate the Arab nations participating in the talks. Israel and the U.S. said and did whatever they wanted in this conference. They tried to frighten the Middle Eastern countries about Iran so that they would forget about Israel.
He added, “We don’t know the nuclear future of Iran, but everyone knows that Israel has enough nuclear warheads to destroy the Middle East many times over.”
Atwan asks, “Hasn’t the time come to be realistic and encourage the Arab countries to use nuclear energy? Can’t they acquire nuclear technology instead of buying billions of dollars of weaponry so that Hillary Clinton would not humiliate them?
We can use a fraction of the $500 billion spent by the Arab nations on weaponry to build a nuclear infrastructure that would put pressure on Israel and be less frightened of Iran.”
A few days ago, Jalal al-Deen al-Ameen, head of the Council of Arab Ambassadors in Vienna, asked the E.U. governments to play their role in creating a nuclear free region and to stop discrimination under the influence of Western policies. He asked the E.U. to stop implementing double standards in this issue.
This report notes that the criticism from inside the Arab society is also heating up.
Hossnin Heikal, a well known Egyptian journalist, told al-Ahram, “The Arabs have forgotten Arab issues and the future of Arabs. Arab citizens and the Arab nations are lacking independence and a vision for development, and they’re in a state of hopelessness.”
We should add that Muammar al-Gaddafi, as one of the pioneer Arab leaders, has also criticized the reaction of the Arab nations to the issue of Palestine and called the decision of the Arab leaders to start the peace process as a shameful decision. He insisted that the only outcome of such a progress would be the destruction of the Arab world.
Why don’t you Muslim try to build peaceful nations before buying weaponry and building nukes? How can this world rest assured that you authoritarian and chaotic nations would launch them irresponsibly?
Because being Muslim contradicts being peaceful!
Nuclear weapons are a waste of money for a country in Iran’s position. Any use of even one of them would result in a nuclear response that would destroy the entire country, and the development of a nuclear arsenal will only encourage countries like the U.S. to start production on a neutron-bomb stockpile, that could be used against any nation that started a nuclear conflict, without fear of harming nearby allies with fallout, or permanently poisoning the real estate.
It is the perfect “green” nuke.
So why waste the time & money?…neither the U.S. nor Israel will toss a nuke at anyone first, due to the catastrophic avalanche of worldwide & domestic outrage (whoever would stupidly order such a thing would no doubt be arrested for war crimes & probably executed, with the blessings of his own countrymen) as well as the threat of retaliation by other nuclear powers, which could conceivably escalate into a devastating world conflict.
Don’t worry…whether or not Iran has a nuclear weapon, no one will roll those dice
So I ask again, why waste the money?
What if a sect is ruling Iran that believes in an end time prophecy which involves destroying Israel to save the world and doesn’t care much about the destruction of their own country??
Tamizifar, then there is nothing you can do to stop it anyway…the genie is out of the bottle, and the ability to get the components to build a nuke is becoming easier every year. Just pray no one is truly that insane.
I’ve attended one of the schools belonging to this sect when I was 12, and that’s the impression I have from this issue.
The article skips brainlessly from the term nuclear weapon to the term nuclear, which can cover research, scanning, medicine and electrical power and heat.
It is obviously pointless propaganda, postulating that moves toward peace are humiliating.
Honestly, listening to this talk about honor and humiliation is like negotiating with a testosterone-fueled teenager who’s drunk.
Diplomacy and compromise are NOT about honor and humiliation, and public media should not be adding to the fire of public indignation. Stirring up the public may sell papers, but the papers are destroyed in the wars that follow.
To the authors of this article: Shut up and reflect about your misuse of media power.
Then until someone thinks they want to go through with it, and until the Islamic world sees the unimaginable results, I guess we’re boned.
You can tell a child to stay away from the stove, but until he burns the skin off his hand, he won’t really believe you.
ormondotvos, You should know some facts about Iran:
– Iran has known natural gas reserves for the next 120 years
– The total Iranian power grid capacity is more than 30,000 Mega Watts
– The Bushehr Power Plant and the whole nuclear fuel cycle will be producing 1,000 Mega Watts (IF IT EVER STARTS WORKING!)
– Producing 1 Mega watt of electricity in a combined cycle plant (burning natural gas) costs nearly one twentieth of a nuclear plant (in Iran)
– The nuclear program has a huge impact on the GDP, worth more than the whole electricity industry
Now can you imagine that this is all for peaceful purposes?
tamizifar,
The purpose of the article is not peace, nor war. Looked at from the viewpoint of the writer, the only legitimate way to look at it, it seems that the writer feels instructed to stir up national honor in whatever irrational way possible, to increase the stability of the rulers by invoking an enemy, and an honorable reaction to such a threat. It’s an old game, as old as stamping around a campfire raising adrenaline before a coordinated hunt for a large game animal, the real genesis of this now impractical behavior.
But I find the MidEast very resistant to the idea of government adapted to the human nature AND the current human condition, both intellectual and technological.
Your arguments about nuclear electricity ignore the global warming problem, which MUST always be considered. Yes, it is true that Iran could trade natural gas electric generators for an abandonment of its nuclear program, and free up a large cadre of technicians for technological advances in infrastructure such as electric vehicles, high-speed rail, wind power, and solar electric and heating.
But they won’t, because, as you see from the article, the people in power (men) are more interested in the stability of the government THEY lead, than in a government of the people.
This is due, I think, to the theocratic nature of Islam, which does not admit of secular government, on what I think are very silly and mythical grounds. I am unalterably opposed to governance based on reveal wisdom that is not modifiable by later discovered evidence. I think morality is in humans, and we don’t have any sort of sin in our nature.
Our nature evolved to fit a particular world that doesn’t exist, any more than the tribal world of Mohammed exists any longer in the wider world. There’s a reason for Islamic warlords as the foundation to which the MidEast keeps crumbling. Humans are no longer bindable to the tribal customs after they’ve seen the wider world on television. Communications AMONG cultures destroys rigid religions, and a religion with hijab and jihad that encourages martyrdom and throws acid in women’s faces is too rigid to continue that way.
Islam needs its Reformation, and it needs it now. Just like warlords must give up their fiefdoms to the central governments, Islam must acknowledge that religion is personal, not governmental.
Note: I will not argue the reality of Islam, or its so-called divine beginnings, any more than I’d argue with children at play about the rules of their particular sandbox. But children must grow up, to join the wider world, or we end up with the Lord of the Flies.