• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

First India, now Israel? The slow death of the NNPT

bit_pattern

Unregistered
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
7,406
What's the point of even having the NNPT if non-member states can be aided in their quest to proliferate while member states are constantly threatened with violence for exercising their rights under the treaty? We may as well rip it up and just have an all out free-for-all at this rate :mad:

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/inside-intel-electricity-indian-style-1.311645

The desire to build such a facility has grown recently due to rising demand for clean nuclear energy as an alternative to the world's dwindling supplies of fossil fuels (despite the recent discoveries of gas off Israel's coast ). The problem is that Israel does not have the know-how, technology, equipment and funds to do this itself. And because it has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, countries that do have the technology and knowledge, like the United States, are forbidden to sell Israel a reactor or help it build one.

Nonetheless, Israel hopes the U.S. will agree to replicate the nuclear agreement that former president George W. Bush signed with India. That agreement, born of strategic considerations, made India an exception to the NPT ban and allowed the U.S. to sell it nuclear technology and know-how. In return, New Delhi agreed to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its nonmilitary nuclear plants, though its nuclear weapon sites continue to operate off limits such supervision.

Israel hopes that in light of the Indian precedent, the U.S. will make an exception for it, too, and sign an agreement that would permit it to acquire reactor technology while leaving Dimona as a secret facility outside international supervision.

Uzi Eilam, a former chairman of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, recently told Alex Doron of the Energia News website (www.energianews.com ) that as far as he knows, "There is some kind or understanding, or even agreement, on this matter with [U.S. President Barack] Obama, under which the U.S. would supply the reactors for the plant or plants on the basis of the arrangement made with India."
 
The thing here is that Israel already has nuclear weapons. This is about nuclear power, not the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
 
No, the thing here is that the entire basis of the NNPT is that signatories will receive assistance and know-how in setting up a peaceful nuclear programme in exchange for states signing up to the NNPT and NOT possessing nuclear weapons. If a state can have nuclear weapons AND receive assistance from the IAEA then what is the point of having the NNPT in the first place? Where is the motivation for a state to forgo developing nuclear weapons?
 
It has always been an unequal system, with different rules for different states.

The same is true with the UN. Five members are "more equal than the others."

It's not an ideal world, and the NPT obviously has its limitations, and has not been as effective as would have been hoped. But even at worst, having an NPT would not seem to be worse than not having one. Without one, there would still be the same motivations and tensions. It's possible that without an NPT even more countries would have nuclear weapons right now.
 
I don't disagree with what you are saying, but this sort of thing, more than anything, puts the NNPT at a serious risk of being made redundant. Forget Iran, this issue of America going around the NNPT to assist nuclear armed non signatories has to be the greatest threat to non-proliferation that there is at the moment.
 
To nobody's surprise, as long as it was merely India involved, certain people here couldn't care less. Only when a chance to blame Israel for something arose (thought for what exactly is not clear) were certain people shocked and dismayed all of a sudden.

Oh, as for "other nations" -- meaning Iran -- being threatened "for exercising their rights under the treaty", this might have something to do with neither India nor Iran being insane theocracies who declared they want to wipe out another state which they consider a "one-bomb country".

It's the same thing as the difference between a carpenter buying an axe while a homicidal axe murderer not being allowed one. What's the point of having laws against killing people with axes when you can just go into a store and buy one!
 
Oh look, shilling for Iran and bashing Israel in one thread. It's almost like kinder surprise.
 
^^ Oh, look, another empty one-liner from lamafarmer the one-man Israeli cheer squad - he lacks the nous to actually have a debate himself so he stands on the sidelines and cheers on his side. How sad.

To nobody's surprise, as long as it was merely India involved, certain people here couldn't care less. Only when a chance to blame Israel for something arose (thought for what exactly is not clear) were certain people shocked and dismayed all of a sudden.

No, not all of a sudden, I wasn't on JREF when America cut a deal with India, but believe me I was very opposed to that move, and I was very opposed to the Australian government of the day's plans to sell uranium to India too.

Oh, as for "other nations" -- meaning Iran -- being threatened "for exercising their rights under the treaty", this might have something to do with neither India nor Iran being insane theocracies who declared they want to wipe out another state which they consider a "one-bomb country".

The whole point of the NNPT is to provide nuclear energy while denying the ability to build bombs, so that's a moot point.

It's the same thing as the difference between a carpenter buying an axe while a homicidal axe murderer not being allowed one. What's the point of having laws against killing people with axes when you can just go into a store and buy one!

That's the most retarded analogy I think I've ever heard. You do realise anyone can buy an axe, no? There's no "are you an axe-murderer" trick question from cashiers at hardware stores.
 
To nobody's surprise, as long as it was merely India involved, certain people here couldn't care less. Only when a chance to blame Israel for something arose (thought for what exactly is not clear) were certain people shocked and dismayed all of a sudden.
I don't know who "certain people here" are but there was considerable opposition to the agreement Bush reached with India for exactly the reason bit_pattern has noted, namely, that it gutted the NNPT. Your paranoia does not serve you well.
 
^^ Oh, look, another empty one-liner from lamafarmer the one-man Israeli cheer squad - he lacks the nous to actually have a debate himself so he stands on the sidelines and cheers on his side. How sad.

Since I don't know what a nous is or are, I guess I do. :cry1
 
No, I speak English, not Greek.

Nous (pronounced /ˈnuːs/, Greek: νοῦς or νόος) is a philosophical term for mind or intellect. Outside of a philosophical context, it is used, in English, to denote "common sense," with a different pronunciation (/naʊs/).

Do you guys actually have anything to say about the NNPT? Or is this just another one of your valuable contributions to the debate, LK? :rolleyes:
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom