[Mb-civic] U.S. Behavior Aids Spread of Nukes

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

Published on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 by MinutemanMedia.org
U.S. Behavior Aids Spread of Nukes
by Stephen Zunes and Kevin Martin

 http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0201-26.htm

In order to address growing tension over Iran’s nuclear program, the 
United States should re-open negotiations seeking to establish a 
nuclear weapons-free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East. Now that Iran 
has withdrawn some facilities from International Atomic Energy Agency 
(IAEA) supervision, establishment of such a zone is imperative. 
Negotiations are the best way—perhaps the only way—to prevent a 
nuclear arms race in this deeply troubled region.

The best intelligence estimates indicate it would take Iran at least five 
years to develop a nuclear weapon, if that indeed is its intention. Thus, 
there is ample time to conduct these talks. Preventing Iran from 
acquiring nuclear weapons is vitally important, but demands for 
unilateral concessions are less likely to succeed than efforts to achieve 
that goal within the framework of a regional disarmament agreement.

UN Security Resolution 687, passed in 1991, which demanded Iraqi 
disarmament, did so within the context of "establishing in the Middle 
East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction." It was alleged 
violations of this resolution that the Bush administration used to justify 
the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But through its own refusal to support the 
establishment of a WMD-free zone for the entire region, the United 
States has failed to push for full implementation of this resolution.

Israel remains the only Middle Eastern state with nuclear weapons, 
and has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty or place 
its nuclear facilities under IAEA inspection. Other countries in the 
region long have asserted that Israel's nuclear arsenal poses a threat 
to their security and thus provokes nuclear proliferation.

This would not be the first effort to negotiate a Middle East NWFZ. In 
1974, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for all 
states in the region to refrain from producing, acquiring, or in any way 
possessing, nuclear weapons, or permitting the stationing of such 
weapons on their territories. It called for the states to place all nuclear 
facilities under IAEA safeguards. In subsequent years, the General 
Assembly has renewed its call several times.

In 1991 a U.S. led Madrid conference for Arab-Israeli peace included a 
process for negotiating a nuclear free zone, but the process was halted 
four years later when the United States failed to push Israel to 
compromise. In late 2003, a draft UN Security Council resolution 
calling for a Middle Eastern NWFZ was tabled following the threat of a 
U.S. veto. In July of 2004, Mohamed El Baradei, head of the IAEA, 
visited Israel and secured an agreement from the Israeli government to 
meet with other Middle Eastern states to discuss the establishment of 
a NWFZ, but the meeting never took place, without apparent U.S. 
objections. Clearly, another effort is needed, this time with the full 
weight of the major powers behind it.

But that effort can only succeed if the United States is willing to pursue 
nonproliferation without the bias it too often has demonstrated. For 
example the United States has announced its intention to enter into a 
nuclear cooperation agreement with India, in violation of both U.S. law 
and international agreements prohibiting such support for countries 
that have refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and 
have developed nuclear weapons. The U.S. also has agreed to provide 
nuclear-capable aircraft to Pakistan. But both countries are in violation 
of UN Security Council resolution 1172, which calls on both Pakistan 
and India to eliminate their nuclear weapons programs.

This pattern of threatening selected states with sanctions, or even 
military action, while tolerating the acquisition and possession of 
nuclear weapons by other states, suggests less interest in non-
proliferation than in geo-politics. If nations are to appeal to international 
law to control the behavior of other nations, they themselves must 
demonstrate a willingness to act within the framework of that law.

What recent experience has so clearly demonstrated is that there can 
be no Pax Americana. If there is to be peace, and especially if 
humankind is to avoid a nuclear holocaust, there must be a universal, 
not a selective, commitment to the rule of law and international 
security.

Stephen Zunes is a Professor of Politics at the University of San 
Francisco and serves on the Board of Directors of the Peace Action 
Education Fund. Kevin Martin is Executive Director of Peace Action 
and the Peace Action Education Fund. Peace Action is the country’s 
largest peace and disarmament organization with over 100,000 
members nationwide, headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland.

© 2006 MinutemanMedia.org


-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, 
option D (up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options 
(option A - 1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option D - 
up to 3x/day) please reply and let us know!  If someone forwarded you 
this email and you want to be on our list, send an email to 
ean at sbcglobal.net and tell us which option you'd like.


"A war of aggression is the supreme international crime." -- Robert Jackson,
 former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice and Nuremberg prosecutor

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060201/69f7ec09/attachment.htm