IranianMay 17th, 2008 - 14:00:55

Why is it that when some countries act to protect their national security we hear barely a whisper of comment, while when others do the same it generates a torrent of righteous indignation? More fundamentally, why can some countries possess hundreds of nuclear warheads (e.g., Israel), or even many thousands (e.g., the United States and Russia), while other countries cannot aspire to obtain even one? What's the principle? What's the argument?

American officials labels the (alleged) nuclear quests of certain non-nuclear weapon states as the 'most serious' challenges confronting the NPT, 'ever.' Yet they say not one single word about the continued deployment by the United States of nearly 10,000 nuclear weapons and assisting Israel to have the same. Nor about its explicit and detailed plans to build both new generations of its nuclear weapons and of its systems for delivering them (long-range strategic bombers, nuclear submarines, and intercontinental ballistic missiles) -- extended over the next three or four decades! Nor about the complete absence of any kind of initiative in Washington even to commence negotiations to comply with our Article VI obligation to achieve universal nuclear disarmament. Nor about the fundamental connection, so clearly articulated and envisioned by the framers of the NPT four long decades ago, between nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.

Report this comment