|
“Israel’s Weapons
of Mass Destruction.” The Bush administration has taken a strong stand against weapons of mass destruction (WMD), focusing most of its concern on the countries of the Middle East. Although the threat these weapons represent is portrayed as serious enough to provoke a preemptive war, the existence of a tremendous stockpile of WMD in one Middle Eastern country is often overlooked and ignored. Alone among its neighbors, Israel possesses an advanced nuclear capability, estimated to include at least 200 warheads and various delivery systems. John Steinbach, a long-time anti-nuclear activist and author, addressed the Israeli nuclear weapons program at a 29 July 2002 Palestine Center (Palestine Center) briefing. Many of the details of the Israeli nuclear program were brought to light by Mordechai Vanunu, a disgruntled former employee at Israel’s Dimona reactor. He secretly took pictures of the sensitive areas of the reactor complex and smuggled them to the United Kingdom, where they were published in the London Sunday Times. Although many had suspected that Israel had an extensive nuclear program, Vanunu’s revelations were the first confirmation of this fact. It is from these pictures that experts made the initial estimates of approximately 200 warheads. Vanunu was kidnapped by Israeli agents and jailed in Israel. The first eleven years of his sentence were served in solitary confinement. Israel had begun developing nuclear weapons in the 1950s seeking an ironclad deterrent against its Arab antagonists. At that time France was supplying most of Israel’s armaments and easily extended its cooperation to the nuclear realm. France built Israel’s reactor at Dimona, in the Negev desert, and Israeli scientists were present at France’s first nuclear test in Algeria. The Dimona reactor was originally built to produce 24 megawatts of power but according to Steinbach, has been upgraded to as high as a 150-megawatt capacity. Israel expanded its capacity to produce bombs with a series of “commando raids” which succeeded in stealing uranium from Britain and France. There are widely held suspicions that several hundred pounds of uranium were diverted to Israel from the nuclear reactor in Apollo, Pennsylvania during the 1960s, but Steinbach stressed that these allegations were never proven. A more reliable source of nuclear material was found in Israel’s long-standing relationship with apartheid South Africa. Israel agreed to supply technological expertise and South Africa provided the raw materials that Israel was lacking. The Israel-South Africa nuclear cooperation culminated in a test of a nuclear device off the coast of South Africa in 1979. Experts speculate that the device tested was a miniature bomb, most likely designed to be used in a 155mm-artillery piece. Despite the detection of an almost unmistakable characteristic double energy flash, American officials equivocated about Israel’s unauthorized nuclear test, refusing to take any action against its flagrant violation of non-proliferation doctrine. The Israeli nuclear program is rarely discussed in the United States, and less so in Israel. Israel’s strict military censorship stands in the way of open examination of the program. As Steinbach noted, a former Israeli General was recently subject to a trial and found guilty for disseminating sensitive information about Israel’s nuclear program, even though it was published in the form of a novel. The Israeli WMD program has continued to expand. In late June, Israel launched the Ofeq 5 satellite into high orbit in a Shavit rocket. The launch was accomplished against the earth’s rotation which, as Steinbach points out, is considerably more difficult than launching with the rotation and indicates a more powerful rocket. With a warhead as a payload instead of a satellite, the Shavit could be used as an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Israel also acquired the capability to launch nuclear weapons from the sea with its purchase of three Dolphin class submarines from Germany, specially modified to accept cruise missiles. Steinbach asserts that the vessels are “among the most, if not the most, advanced diesel submarines in the world,” and doubts that any country, besides the United States, has the capacity to destroy them. The submarines represent a second-strike capacity. They remain at sea at all times, and should anything happen to Israel, the submarines would still be able to strike back at Israel’s enemies. Some experts have explained Israel’s vast and disproportionate nuclear arsenal as less of a strategic threat against its neighbors and more of a “bargaining chip” to obtain concessions from the United States. During the 1973 war when Israel was reeling from the initial Egyptian/Syrian attack and concerned enough to deploy its nuclear weapons and go on nuclear alert. According to Steinbach, Israel’s ambassador called former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and threatened to use nuclear weapons unless the United States immediately agreed to provide Israel with the military supplies it needed. The United States promptly complied, staging what was then the largest military airlift of its history. Israel has declared that its policy is to respond with nuclear weapons if it is ever attacked by non-conventional means. In Israeli eyes non-conventional also includes missile strikes on its cities. Steinbach believes that Israel’s restraint in the Gulf War, under repeated Iraqi Scud missile strikes, ran counter to its policy. He doubts, however, whether Israel would continue to show restraint if another American attack on Iraq were to prompt Iraq to fire Scuds at Israel again. Steinbach warned that as long as Israel maintained its “overwhelming arsenal” of WMD it creates a dynamic which impels other states in the region to develop their own arsenals. He believes that unless the world community confronts Israel about its nuclear arsenal the chances for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East are very dim. The above text is based on remarks delivered on 29 July 2002 by John Steinbach. The speaker’s views do not necessarily reflect those of the Palestine Center (Palestine Center) or The Jerusalem Fund. This “For the Record” may be used without permission but with proper attribution to Palestine Center. To contact Steinbach, write to johnsteinbach@comcast.net. This information first appeared in “For the Record” No. 123, 29 July 2002. |
||