In Plane Sight

U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal Puts Israel In Hot Seat

By Marc Perelman

Published June 16, 2006, issue of June 16, 2006.
  • Print
  • Share Share

On its face, the nuclear deal signed by the Bush administration and India, now heading for approval before Congress, sets a good precedent for Israel. In effect, Washington is rewarding a country that developed nuclear weapons in circumvention of the landmark nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, sanctioning its arsenal after the fact because of its responsible behavior.

But critics both in and outside of Congress counter that making such exceptions for nuclear violators at a time of major concern over Iran’s nuclear ambitions could prove to be a double-edged sword from Israel’s point of view. By granting legitimacy to India’s nuclear arsenal, critics say that the deal will raise complaints of double standards and spark new calls for international scrutiny. Any such debate is likely to bring an unwelcome spotlight onto Israel and to re-energize longstanding calls by Muslim countries for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons.

Early indications already have surfaced that Israel, which never has acknowledged its nuclear status, could face renewed pressure as new efforts emerge to forge a new and improved nuclear nonproliferation regime.

Earlier this month, as a step toward a nuclear-free Middle East, a United Nations commission on weapons of mass destruction recommended that Israel refrain from manufacturing more nuclear weapons. The call to Israel was among 60 recommendations released by the U.N. commission, which is chaired by Hans Blix, former head of weapons inspections in Iraq. But while the commission urged most nations to refrain from developing nuclear weapons, it urged Israel to stop manufacturing them.

Another possible source of pressure is a draft treaty, aimed at banning the production of fissile material, introduced by the United States last month at a U.N. conference on disarmament in Geneva. The 65-member conference has been deadlocked for years on the proposed treaty, known as the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, because of disagreements over whether it should cover existing stocks and include a verification regime. Israel joins with existing nuclear powers in opposing an intrusive mechanism, but developing countries consistently have called for the treaty to include total nuclear disarmament. The American draft would leave existing stockpiles untouched and does not envision inspections, irking Third World countries. However, among actual or presumed nuclear countries outside the Non-Proliferation regime, such as India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea, the draft is raising concerns about increased international monitoring. The five official nuclear countries — America, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom — are believed to be observing a moratorium on the production of fissile material. Washington is calling for an agreement on the treaty by the end of the year.

The debate is unfolding amid new disclosures that appear to confirm Israel’s nuclear activities. Last month, the Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot reported on a newly disclosed document. It indicated that the American government became aware in 1979 of a joint nuclear test conducted at the time by Israel and South Africa, on an offshore platform in the northern Antarctic. Yediot reported that an American satellite had detected the explosion, and analysts concluded that it was a nuclear test conducted by the two countries, according to a previously undisclosed document transmitted at the time to the Carter White House. Though Israel is believed to have a number of nuclear weapons, it has never acknowledged it officially.

Wade Boese, research director of the Arms Control Association in Washington, said that Israel would send a powerful message if it would announce the closing of its nuclear plant in Dimona. “It would show that Israel is moving towards the nuclear mainstream,” he said, noting that all five major nuclear powers have stopped producing fissile material. However, he acknowledged that the prospects of such a step were limited given the current tensions in the region, especially with Iran.

The America-India nuclear deal, signed in March during a visit to New Delhi by President Bush, grants India a special one-time exemption from the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, acknowledging India as a “responsible” nuclear weapons state. In exchange for accepting international inspections of its civilian program, New Delhi will be able to obtain foreign nuclear technology, including that of America. Such sales had been banned to both India and its archrival, Pakistan, ever since the two nations conducted nuclear tests in 1998. The March deal effectively recognizes India’s status as a nuclear power. No such move is expected with Pakistan, which remains under a cloud because of the scandal over the illegal sales of nuclear material to rogue states by its former leading nuclear scientist, A.Q. Khan.

As part of the discussions with India, Washington has asked that New Delhi enact a legal ban on further nuclear testing and pledge adherence to the fissile materials cutoff treaty.

For the deal to come into effect, Congress must amend the Atomic Energy Act. The administration had hoped to push the changes through this summer, but it got only lukewarm support from the senior Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. Discussion of the deal is now expected to take place only after the November midterm elections.

While the Israeli government has not taken a strong position on the India deal, some of Israel’s supporters in America, including the American Jewish Committee, have urged Congress to ratify it.

The director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, also has endorsed the agreement, calling it a “win-win situation.”

“The Bush administration has been very careful to stress that this is not a friendly favor,” Boese said “But it does send the message that it has a selective approach to nonproliferation and that it acts out of concerns for the regime rather than the nuclear capabilities.”

In addition, some observers argue that the agreement weakens the West’s position vis-à-vis Iran. Tehran is signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has allowed inspectors to visit its facilities, and it claims to be entitled to develop nuclear energy for civilian purposes. Western countries believe that Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons, however, and are pressuring Tehran to suspend all its enrichment activities or face sanctions.

Find us on Facebook!
  • This is what the rockets over Israel and Gaza look like from space:
  • "Israel should not let captives languish or corpses rot. It should do everything in its power to recover people and bodies. Jewish law places a premium on pidyon shvuyim, “the redemption of captives,” and proper burial. But not when the price will lead to more death and more kidnappings." Do you agree?
  •'s Allison Benedikt wrote that Taglit-Birthright Israel is partly to blame for the death of American IDF volunteer Max Steinberg. This is why she's wrong:
  • Israeli soldiers want you to buy them socks. And snacks. And backpacks. And underwear. And pizza. So claim dozens of fundraising campaigns launched by American Jewish and Israeli charities since the start of the current wave of crisis and conflict in Israel and Gaza.
  • The sign reads: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances.”
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • "It pains and shocks me to say this, but here goes: My father was right all along. He always told me, as I spouted liberal talking points at the Shabbos table and challenged his hawkish views on Israel and the Palestinians to his unending chagrin, that I would one day change my tune." Have you had a similar experience?
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight":
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?

We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.