Israel's Nuclear Arsenal By Spork in News Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 05:16:05 AM EST Tags: Focus On... (all tags) After decades of half-hearted secrecy, Israel is finally discussing its large nuclear arsenal. According to John Steinbach's carefully researched and widely republished report, the existence of that arsenal has long been an important bargaining chip in Israeli foreign policy. What follows is an analysis of the purpose and relevance of Israeli nuclear weapons to the current volatile situatation. For those interested in learning more about the history of the Israeli nuclear weapons program, see this old (1992?) but well-written report, and these documents gathered in research for Avner Cohen's book Israel and the Bomb. The short story is that program was well underway in the mid 50's at the behest of Israel's first prime minister David Ben-Gurion. The Eisenhower administration had a weapons embargo against Israel, but France's nuclear scientists proved quite willing to share their designs for a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor. Kennedy, who strongly opposed nuclear proliferation, agreed to end Eisenhower's weapons embargo in exchange for Israel's assurance that they will not build nuclear weapons. However, the program continued, and shortly after the 1967 war, Israel had several working nuclear warheards. The initial uranium to power their first reactors came from France. Later, more was mined inside Israel, until the apartheid government of South Africa agreed to provide a steady supply. In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, one of the scientists in the bomb project, felt it was his duty to inform the international press about the nature and magnitude of the Israeli nuclear program. For this he was arrested and remains a prisoner of Israel to this day, despite prominent movements urging for his freedom. Presently, the magnitude of the Israeli nuclear arsenal is estimated at anywhere between 200 and 500 warheards. While the history is quite uncontroversial, the purpose of all these nuclear weapons is a subject of much debate. Some sources claim that the warheads, mounted on long-range Jericho missiles, are intended for deterrence and as weapons of last resort. Evidence for this is French and Russian satellite data revealing that they are not siloed in border regions but instead at the center of Israel--a defensive arrangement. However, Steinbach's report draws a rather different conclusion. Deterrence weapons are usually designed to have a very high yield; they are doomsday devices. However, a large fraction of the Israeli arsenal consists of neutron bombs. These produce a relatively small explosion and less radioactive fallout than other designs. Their primary mechanism of destruction is a deadly burst of high-speed neutrons, which destroys all living tissue within miles. Because of this design, Israeli bombs could even be used against their immediate neighbors without Israel suffering much from the radioactive cloud they produce. The US calls such low-yield bombs "theater nuclear weapons" and plans to build more of them for a variety of battlefield and first-strike roles (see Bush's recent Nuclear Posture Review, analysis). The idea of first-strike nukes is that they should be small enough so as to not deter the country who owns them from launching them. In this way, the Israeli arsenal has the makeup of a first-strike force. Lending further support to this is a series of alarming statements by high-ranking Israeli officials. Steinbach's report contains many, but some highlights are "Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches." (Ariel Sharon) "The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional." (Israeli president Ezar Weissman). "Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East..., without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones." (Israel Shahak) Many other threats to use nuclear weapons against the non-nuclear-capable countries of the Middle East are more subtle, but such threats are quite regular. This, together with the fact that no nuclear power is threatening Israel leads credence to Steinbach's thesis that Israeli nuclear weapons are a first-strike arsenal, and that Israel seems quite prepared use it as such. Of course, the deterrence/first-strike dichotomy is a very blunt one and cannot capture all of the different roles for which Israel might use their bombs. It is in their interest to appear more ready to nuke than they really are. This makes their enemies think twice. More importantly, perhaps, it wields influence over how they are treated by the United States. Remember that the US would suffer considerably if nuclear bombs started going off in the Middle East. The oil from the region lubricates our entire economy. Steinbach notes several occasions where Israel's message to the US has been: "Either you concede something to us (for example: billions in military supplies each year) or we will solve our security crisis our own way, and you won't like it." As long as the United States actually believes that Israel might use their nuclear weapons, it will be quite motivated to make whatever concessions Israel requests. This article is not intended to be alarmist. Indeed, as long as the foreign policies of the US and Israel remain joined at the hip, there is little chance that Israel would launch nuclear weapons. However, Israel's recent movement to the extreme right might test how long this policy union can be maintained. Israel has demonstrated repeatedly that they are prepared to be quite brutal when defending their interests, permitting assassinations, torture and other measures banned my most civilized countries. If they are hit hard by terrorism (WTC-scale), and it's quite likely they will be sooner or later, will they respond with nuclear weapons? They repeatedly claim they are prepared to, and perhaps they are. Also, what is the United States prepared to offer to prevent Israel from using nuclear weapons? With the daily news openly discussing the possibility that the current fighting in the Middle East could easily escalate into an full-scale war, taken together with Weissman's statement that the next war will be nuclear, really should focus our attention on the Israeli nuclear issue, as unpleasant as that may be. While there has been much talk that tensions between Pakistan and India could produce a nuclear exchange, it might be more probable that next nuclear bomb that is used against people will be Israeli. Unlike with India/Pakistan, nobody would fire back. Full discussion: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/4/17/13711/7924