Israel sees nuclear vindication in Obama comments

Related Video

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington July 6, 2010. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meet in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington July 6, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

JERUSALEM | Wed Jul 7, 2010 3:48pm EDT

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - An Israeli deputy prime minister said President Barack Obama's recognition of Israel's "unique security requirements" was a clear signal that Washington backed Israel's secretive nuclear strategy while working toward ridding the region of atomic arms.

The Obama administration alarmed Israel in May by backing an Egyptian initiative for talks in 2012 on a Middle East free of weapons of mass-destruction. Widely assumed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the region, Israel had previously been spared such scrutiny by its guardian ally.

Yet hosting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Tuesday, Obama echoed Israel's veiled justifications for having the bomb.

Obama told reporters: "We strongly believe that, given its size, its history, the region that it's in, and the threats that are leveled against us -- against it, that Israel has unique security requirements."

Dan Meridor, Netanyahu's deputy prime minister in charge of nuclear affairs, said Obama's endorsement was not new but that its public expression -- two months after Washington supported Egypt's proposal at a review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- was significant.

"Why repeat this publicly? Because between then and now there was the NPT conference that may have created the impression that there is a change in the American view," Meridor told Reuters.

The White House said Obama had further pledged to keep Israel, which has not signed the NPT, from being "singled out" at a meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog in Vienna in September as well as at the Egyptian-proposed regional conference in 2012.

"I think that this entire presentation gives a clear picture of the understanding between Israel and the United States in this matter, and sets the record straight," Meridor said, reiterating Israel's stand that it would have to be assured of reconciliation with its neighbors before it could consider a disarmament treaty.

ATOMIC ENERGY

In their first meeting last year, Netanyahu and Obama reaffirmed a 40-year-old American "don't ask, don't tell" approach to Israel's nuclear capacities.

The comments, following a rocky period in U.S.-Israel relations, were greeted with relief in the Jewish state.

Meridor said Obama's statement "was without a doubt a special and significant text. It was important for us, and it was important for the region."

Israel neither confirms nor denies having nuclear weapons under an "ambiguity" strategy billed as warding off foes while avoiding public provocations that can spark regional arms races.

The official reticence, and its toleration in Washington, has long aggrieved many Arabs and Iranians -- especially given U.S.-led pressure on Tehran to rein in its nuclear program.

Obama's carrot-and-stick diplomacy with Iran has prompted some analysts to predict Netanyahu could face U.S. calls to accept curbs on Israeli capabilities in the name of parity.

Meridor, who rejects comparisons of Israel to NPT-signatory Iran, said there was no such "trade-off" in the works.

In a separate development Wednesday, Israeli officials said the United States had offered to help Israel produce atomic energy despite Israel's refusal to sign the NPT, which is designed to stop countries using civilian programs as cover for building nuclear bombs.

Army Radio's diplomatic correspondent said the offer could put Israel on a par with India, another NPT holdout which is openly nuclear-armed but in 2008 secured a U.S.-led deal granting it civilian nuclear imports.

By staying outside the NPT, Israel has avoided forswearing nuclear arms or admitting nuclear inspectors. But it has also lost out on assistance available to treaty signatories for producing civilian atomic energy.

Meridor declined to comment on the report, as did the U.S. embassy.

(Additional reporting by Jeffrey Heller in New York)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
Louabbott51 wrote:
The farce of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
The overall thrust of U.S. policy in the region is due almost entirely to the activities of the “Israel Lobby.” No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise be. The result? Very possibly a bloodbath that spills over into the instigator of this failed war, Israel.

David Albright estimate that Israel may have stockpiled between 100 to 200 warheads using the plutonium reprocessed from Dimona. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad mentions it all the time. The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel’s lie and refusal of Israel to sign the NPT is HYPOCRITICAL and personally embarrasses me as an American.

Jul 07, 2010 3:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
irwinsteffy wrote:
before we spill more blood and expense in a new “forever war’ this time with Iran, over lies about WMDs, (what is now referred to as ‘bad intelligence re: Iraq,) , well, never mind.
As long as AIPAC has a stranglehold on our foreign policy, we will continue to spiral into oblivion.

Jul 07, 2010 7:05pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
irwinsteffy wrote:
Right…says Obama…while the previous administrations were neck deep selling nuclear technology to Israel.

How hypocrite can someone become?

Jul 07, 2010 7:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.