Skip to main content

Egyptians make a valid point

No comment called required for what seems more than a valid point made by the Egyptians.

"Egypt ceremoniously walked out of Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) talks in Geneva on Monday in protest of what it called a "lack of will" to implement a 1995 resolution for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons.

The diplomatic protest follows recent comments from an Egyptian official pointing out the hypocrisy of Israel's secretive and undeclared nuclear weapons program.

In a speech on the first day of the NPT conference on April 22, former Egyptian Ambassador to Geneva Hisham Badr said, "Egypt and many Arab countries have joined the NPT with the understanding that this would lead to a Middle East completely free of nuclear weapons. However, more than 30 years later, one country in the Middle East, namely Israel, remains outside the NPT."

Now, in the second week of talks, Egypt insists that no progress has been made towards the 1995 resolution, saying it was pulling out of the talks "to send a strong message of non-acceptance of the continued lack of seriousness in dealing with the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East".

As Reuters reports, U.S. and Israeli officials have said a nuclear arms-free zone in the Middle East could not be realized until Iran curbed its nuclear energy program. Meanwhile, as alluded to by Badr, Isreal is the only country in the region that has a nuclear arsenal. Despite this, Israel and the US refuse to discuss or even acknowledge the Israeli nuclear weapons program, but continues to wave their finger at Iran.

Conclusive evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons has not been established, and the government repeatedly proclaims it has no desire to possess such weapons and has loudly and repeatedly supported the idea of truly nuclear-free zone in the Middle East."


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more