From Tony Karon writing on Time:
"Walking out on Monday's U.N. speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may have been good domestic politics for the Obama Administration and its closest European allies, but it won't necessarily help them prevail at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference that began on the same day. In fact, the move by delegates from the U.S., Britain, France, Canada, Hungary, New Zealand and the Netherlands, among others, may have perversely played to Ahmadinejad's advantage."
And:
"In the process, Ahmadinejad smartly highlighted an uncomfortable truth about the NPT: it doesn't allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, but nor does it advocate that the U.S., Russia, France, Britain and China — or Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea — be allowed to keep theirs. (Never mind threaten to use them to police compliance with the treaty, a prerogative that the Obama Administration's review seemed to suggest.) The essential bargain of the NPT, which came into effect in 1970, was that non-nuclear states would refrain from building weapons, while those that already had them would make credible moves toward disarmament. Clinton's argument that the U.S. would retain nuclear weapons as a deterrent as long as they exist elsewhere may not have been sufficient with the countries of the developing world. So, while Western diplomats focus on questions raised by Iran's noncompliance with the treaty's transparency requirements for its program, Ahmadinejad focused on the established nuclear powers' failure to make significant steps toward disarmament. As far as most of the developing world is concerned, both would be considered equal transgressions of the NPT.
(Comment on this story.)
Just as predictably, but no less problematically for the U.S. and its allies, Ahmadinejad aligned himself with the demand put forward by Egypt, backed by other moderate Arab regimes, for the enforcement of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. In doing so, the Iranian President specifically targeted Washington's tacit acceptance of Israel's "nuclear ambiguity" — while it is generally assumed to have up to 200 nuclear warheads, the Jewish state neither acknowledges nor denies the existence of that arsenal. Israel is not participating in the U.N. conference because — like India and Pakistan — it has not signed the NPT. (North Korea was a signatory but withdrew to develop its bomb program.)
The U.S. narrative on the Iranian nuclear threat portrays it as a menace against which all moderate countries of the Middle East are united. But the Egyptians are bluntly pointing out that Iran can't be confronted while turning a blind eye to Israel. "We don't think that there should be first-class countries that are acquiring nuclear weapons and second-class countries that are not in possession of nuclear weapons in the Middle East," Egypt's U.N. ambassador, Maged Abdelaziz, said last week. "We say that in order to be able to deal with the Iranian issue, you have to address the nuclear capabilities of Israel." The Egyptians, on whose support the U.S. depends for isolating Iran, want both Israel and Iran brought into an NPT-led regional conference on a nuclear-free Middle East next year, and are demanding that the U.S. sign up to the effort to make both compliant with a regime of transparency and disarmament."
"Walking out on Monday's U.N. speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may have been good domestic politics for the Obama Administration and its closest European allies, but it won't necessarily help them prevail at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference that began on the same day. In fact, the move by delegates from the U.S., Britain, France, Canada, Hungary, New Zealand and the Netherlands, among others, may have perversely played to Ahmadinejad's advantage."
And:
"In the process, Ahmadinejad smartly highlighted an uncomfortable truth about the NPT: it doesn't allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, but nor does it advocate that the U.S., Russia, France, Britain and China — or Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea — be allowed to keep theirs. (Never mind threaten to use them to police compliance with the treaty, a prerogative that the Obama Administration's review seemed to suggest.) The essential bargain of the NPT, which came into effect in 1970, was that non-nuclear states would refrain from building weapons, while those that already had them would make credible moves toward disarmament. Clinton's argument that the U.S. would retain nuclear weapons as a deterrent as long as they exist elsewhere may not have been sufficient with the countries of the developing world. So, while Western diplomats focus on questions raised by Iran's noncompliance with the treaty's transparency requirements for its program, Ahmadinejad focused on the established nuclear powers' failure to make significant steps toward disarmament. As far as most of the developing world is concerned, both would be considered equal transgressions of the NPT.
(Comment on this story.)
Just as predictably, but no less problematically for the U.S. and its allies, Ahmadinejad aligned himself with the demand put forward by Egypt, backed by other moderate Arab regimes, for the enforcement of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. In doing so, the Iranian President specifically targeted Washington's tacit acceptance of Israel's "nuclear ambiguity" — while it is generally assumed to have up to 200 nuclear warheads, the Jewish state neither acknowledges nor denies the existence of that arsenal. Israel is not participating in the U.N. conference because — like India and Pakistan — it has not signed the NPT. (North Korea was a signatory but withdrew to develop its bomb program.)
The U.S. narrative on the Iranian nuclear threat portrays it as a menace against which all moderate countries of the Middle East are united. But the Egyptians are bluntly pointing out that Iran can't be confronted while turning a blind eye to Israel. "We don't think that there should be first-class countries that are acquiring nuclear weapons and second-class countries that are not in possession of nuclear weapons in the Middle East," Egypt's U.N. ambassador, Maged Abdelaziz, said last week. "We say that in order to be able to deal with the Iranian issue, you have to address the nuclear capabilities of Israel." The Egyptians, on whose support the U.S. depends for isolating Iran, want both Israel and Iran brought into an NPT-led regional conference on a nuclear-free Middle East next year, and are demanding that the U.S. sign up to the effort to make both compliant with a regime of transparency and disarmament."
Comments