Grossi: Contributing to giving Israel a justification to attack Iran!!
Afrasianet - Israel's main pretext for attacking Iran is to prevent it from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and the fact that this flimsy pretext is the greatest proof of the hypocrisy and double standards of Israel, which itself possesses a "secret" nuclear program that it does not publicly admit.
Amid the global blackout and silence over the uncertainty of Israel's nuclear program, few reports reveal the covert on that secret program. As the military confrontation between Israel and Iran raged, a New York Times report came to expose some of the information Israel insists on withholding from the eyes of the world. According to the Center for Arms Control and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, Israel is widely believed to possess at least 90 nuclear warheads and has enough fissile material to produce hundreds more.
The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency has assessed that 30 countries have the capability to develop nuclear weapons, but only nine are known to possess them. Israel ranks second to last in terms of the size of the nuclear arsenal among these nine countries, ahead only of North Korea, according to the Nobel Peace Prize winning International Nuclear Disarmament Campaign. Experts say Israel is capable of launching its nuclear warheads from fighter jets, submarines or land-based ballistic missile launchers.
Israel is one of five countries along with India, Pakistan, North Korea and South Sudan that have not signed the U.N. Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The agreement, which entered into force in 1970, generally obliges signatories to promote the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The treaty recognizes only five states as formal nuclear states: the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China, the five permanent members of the Security Council. International.
Historically, researchers believe that in 1958 Israel began building a nuclear weapons development site near the southern town of Dimona. By 1967, Israel had secretly developed the ability to manufacture nuclear explosives, according to the Arms Control Association. By 1973, the United States was "convinced that Israel possessed nuclear weapons," as later revealed by the Federation of American Scientists. Israel is not among the countries protected by the U.S. "nuclear umbrella," a protection that aims not only to deter adversaries but also to dissuade them from developing their own nuclear weapons.
Experts argue that the fact that Israel is not under this umbrella is an unspoken acknowledgement that Israel has its own nuclear arsenal and does not need U.S. protection or deterrence. Over the past fifty years, few reports have emerged that Israel may have tested its nuclear weapons at underground sites, including in the southern Negev desert.
Israel is above accountability and Iran is under scrutiny. Politicization of the nuclear file in the Middle East
With the escalation of regional tensions in the wake of the recent Israeli attacks on Iran, which affected a number of nuclear facilities and uranium enrichment sites, the risks facing the nuclear safety system in the Middle East are increasing, in light of the divergent policy and double standards taken by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which raised concerns about the potential effects on neighboring countries, with the intensification of the conflict and the continuous Israeli violation of international law, and the exchange of threats by both sides to target nuclear facilities..
The Israeli attack on Iran came to further complicate the course of nuclear negotiations, following the decision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which accused Iran of not complying with its obligations, which Tehran rejected, stressing that it had prepared a package of measures to respond to any escalation. The Iranian Foreign Ministry criticized what it described as double standards, noting in a statement that Western countries that raise the slogan of nuclear non-proliferation provide direct support for the Israeli military nuclear program, while attacking the declared Iranian nuclear program.
Major Powers
Dr. Karim Al-Adham, a nuclear energy expert and former director of the Nuclear Safety Center, believes that managing the nuclear file globally is being used to serve the interests of major powers at the expense of the principles of international peace and security. In his view, this bias is evident in the performance of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which adapts its regulatory standards to serve the United States and Israel.
Al-Adham pointed out in his statement to Akher Sa'a that Israel has not signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and therefore its facilities are not subject to any inspection system of the Agency, despite what is indicated by estimates and intelligence leaks that it possesses about 300 nuclear warheads. However, the IAEA has not even asked it to open its monitoring facilities, unlike what it does vis-à-vis other countries, although its primary role is supposed to include monitoring violations and reporting to the Security Council.
He pointed out that the problem lies in the fact that the accession of countries to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is voluntary, and there is no international mechanism to force any country to do so, which Israel benefits from to avoid censorship, while exerting political pressure on other countries, such as Iran. Al-Adham warns of the danger of Israeli attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities, stressing that these facilities enjoy immunity under international law and non-proliferation treaties, and targeting them is a grave violation of those conventions.
Risks of leaks
Dr. Ali Abdul Nabi, former vice president of the Nuclear Plants Authority, confirmed to Akher Sa'a that the danger resulting from targeting Iranian nuclear facilities can be assessed at more than one level, although so far high levels of radiation have not been detected outside the facilities and uranium enrichment sites that have been targeted, but the trend announced by Israel to target other sites puts it in danger, in light of the complete absence of legal accountability for the Israeli entity.
These risks are governed by several factors, as Abdul Nabi points out, the first of which is the type of accident, the nature of the targeted facility and the radioactive materials it contains, as well as the degree of immunity of the facilities, the strength of the blows that they can receive, the places of the explosion and their severity, in addition to the behavior of radioactive materials, whose spread depends on the directions and strength of the wind, which can transmit radioactive contamination through the so-called nuclear cloud to neighboring countries and other areas outside the borders, he explains.
Nuclear reactors, unlike the uranium enrichment facilities that have been targeted, contain highly radioactive materials, which are the products of nuclear fission, which can cause a huge environmental disaster if the reactor is attacked that leads to its destruction or affects its cooling systems, this can cause the reactor core to melt or leak radioactive materials into the atmosphere, the waters of the Arabian Gulf and the surrounding environment.
While the radioactive effect of uranium enrichment facilities is limited to a limited extent, he explains, pointing out that the materials used in these facilities, such as uranium hexafluoride, do not spread easily in their solid state, and their exposure to an explosion can lead to serious chemical contamination in the surrounding environment, but it is difficult to transmit in most cases. However, most of these Iranian facilities are heavily fortified in their underground locations, making it difficult to have a significant impact on them.
Question about IAEA?
Nasser Qandil wrote earlier:
Despite the immorality of countries falling into double standards in dealing with similar phenomena, it can be understood as long as countries pay a moral and moral price from their reputation and political balance when they are injured in their credibility, whether in front of their internal public opinion, or international public opinion, and both of them affect the stability and effectiveness of the authorities of these countries, but UN organizations are not bodies that come by elections to practice politics at their whim, and bear its results in elections within Their country, or reactions to their policies outside their country, are organizations responsible for watching over charters agreed upon by the countries of the world under the slogan of implementing one or more articles of the Charter of the United Nations .
- The balances to which the UN organizations are subject and the way they control the selection of those in charge of them reflect the balance of power within the international community, a balance of power that until yesterday was governed by Western unilateralism controlling the United Nations and its decisions and the way of selecting its officials .
- When we talk about the International Atomic Energy Agency, it is related to the application of the principle of seeking a world free of nuclear weapons, and ensuring the peaceful nuclear programs of the countries of the world, through the Charter of the Agency and programs that are directed to countries to sign and join its standards, and with a simple look it appears that in our region Iran stands on one bank and Israel stands on the opposite bank, in return for Iran, which professes to be a country seeking a peaceful nuclear program and is subject to the charters and plans of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Israel rejects all The Agency and the whole world know that it has a military program, the fruit of which is hundreds of nuclear warheads, and this means that the Agency must be in a state of cooperation with Iran, whatever the controversial files under the roof of a peaceful nuclear program, and stand on a state of rupture with Israel, a translation of the Israeli rupture with the mission and role of the Agency, and when Israel has the status of a distinguished friend of the Agency and treats Iran as Naughty schoolboy, it's like UNESCO trading in children, white slaves and stolen antiquities .
- The essence of the imbalance in the status of nuclear files in the world is this anomaly that governs the relationship of the International Agency with "Israel", there is no credibility for the Agency's pursuit of a world free of nuclear weapons, in light of the distinguished relationship of the Agency and its director with "Israel", up to the adoption of Israeli reports as a military nuclear entity contrary to the law, about the Iranian nuclear program as a basis for judging this peaceful program, and without correcting this imbalance by putting the Agency in a state of confrontation with the nuclear program The Israeli military, and making it in the rank of all the Agency's dealings with countries with peaceful programs, will keep the path of nuclear crises in the world open, the Agency will not find a country other than Iran that does not voluntarily and voluntarily not want not to have a military program, and perhaps the North Korean example is the best appropriate response to an agency managed in this way
Double standards
Former Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour says:
Since Iran began its peaceful nuclear program, the eyes of Western countries, led by the United States, France, Britain and Germany, especially Israel, have been following Iran's nuclear program with great care and concern. This concern and concern were absent from the scene when Western countries were providing without limits, everything that achieves Israel's desire and ambition to establish a nuclear reactor, through the scientific and technological assistance and contributions it obtained in the fifties and sixties of the last century to become a later state. Nuclear, possessing an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. All this was achieved thanks to the Western countries, which preferred to remain silent and still ignore Israel's nuclear arsenal, so that Israel would later become the sixth country in the world to possess this weapon, and the first in the Middle East. In the absence of IAEA inspection, which Israel categorically rejects, and its ambiguity about its nuclear arsenal.
The West's handling of the Iranian nuclear file is completely different from its dealings with Israel, which has left it without objectivity, credibility and integrity.
What peace and security do the United States and the West want for the Middle East? Is there any leader in the West, no matter how high, who dares to demand that Israel's nuclear program be inspected by IAEA experts and that the objectives of the programme be verified and the level it has reached? Does he dare to accuse it, or demand sanctions to prevent it from subjecting its nuclear reactor to IAEA monitoring, as it does with Iran? It is the West, which is always biased, discredited, has double standards, sees only with one eye, this is how it is, and this is how it will remain.
Israeli-Iranian Nuclear Program: Double Standards
The West's handling of the Iranian nuclear file is completely different from its dealings with Israel, which has left it without objectivity, credibility and integrity. The West knows full well that Israel possesses nuclear weapons that threaten stability and security in the Middle East, while it still does not officially recognize its possession of nuclear weapons, but rather maintains a policy of obfuscation and deliberate ambiguity.