9 june 2015
CIA Director, John Brennan
Israeli media sources have revealed that CIA Director, John Brennan, secretly visited Tel Aviv and that the discussions between the two parties focused on the upcoming nuclear deal between Iran and the global superpowers, as well as "Iran's involvement in terrorism and its plots in the Middle East".
Haaretz newspaper reported today that it was informed by two senior Israeli officials that Brenan was a guest of Mossad chief Tamir Pardo a few days ago. During his visit, he had a series of meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Advisor Yossi Cohen, and a number of Israeli intelligence officials, including chief of Military Intelligence, Major General Herzl "Hertzi" Halevi.
According to the newspaper, the visit that took place on Thursday had been scheduled a long time ago, but was conducted during a "critical political moment", nearly a month before the deadline set for signing the Iranian nuclear agreement. The newspaper also noted that it is unclear whether Brenan delivered any messages from US President Barack Obama to Netanyahu regarding the agreement, given the opposing views and deep disputes between the two countries with regards to this settlement.
Israeli media sources have revealed that CIA Director, John Brennan, secretly visited Tel Aviv and that the discussions between the two parties focused on the upcoming nuclear deal between Iran and the global superpowers, as well as "Iran's involvement in terrorism and its plots in the Middle East".
Haaretz newspaper reported today that it was informed by two senior Israeli officials that Brenan was a guest of Mossad chief Tamir Pardo a few days ago. During his visit, he had a series of meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Advisor Yossi Cohen, and a number of Israeli intelligence officials, including chief of Military Intelligence, Major General Herzl "Hertzi" Halevi.
According to the newspaper, the visit that took place on Thursday had been scheduled a long time ago, but was conducted during a "critical political moment", nearly a month before the deadline set for signing the Iranian nuclear agreement. The newspaper also noted that it is unclear whether Brenan delivered any messages from US President Barack Obama to Netanyahu regarding the agreement, given the opposing views and deep disputes between the two countries with regards to this settlement.
Above: Explosion of a radioactive device and use of mini-drones to check radiation. Below: Testing of radioactive materials in a mock shopping mall.
A series of experiments have been conducted by Israel to examine the effects of and damage caused by so-called "dirty" bombs, a combination of conventional explosive and radioactive materials. The tests were part of the "Green Field" project over the past four years at the nuclear reactor in Dimona. The project supervisors insisted that the objectives were defensive rather than offensive.
According to Haaretz, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in the USA concerns grew about the possibility of terrorist gaining access to "dirty" bombs, as threatened by Al-Qaeda at the time. Such threats have not materialised. Israel, however, has been conducting the tests to see what might happen in the event that such a weapon is used.
In 2006, the Israeli Ministry of Health issued instructions about the treatment necessary if dirty bombs were deployed against targets in the country. The experiments started in Dimona in 2010 and ended last year; their findings were published in scientific circles. Twenty bombs weighing between a quarter kilogram and 25 kilogram mixed with "Technetium-99m", which is used in the pharmaceutical industry, were built for the programme of tests.
It was discovered that there was a very high rate of radiation in the centre of the explosion as well as small amounts dispersed by the wind in the surrounding areas. However, the conclusion from the research suggests that the fundamental danger associated with such bombs compared with "regular" munitions is connected more with the psychological impact on the public.
Haaretz exclusive: Israel tested 'dirty-bomb cleanup' in the desert
Series of tests in conjunction with four-year project at Dimona nuclear reactor measured damage and other implications of detonation of radiological weapon by hostile forces.
Israel recently carried out a series of tests in the desert in conjunction with a four-year project at the Dimona nuclear reactor to measure the damage and other implications of the detonation of a so-called “dirty” radiological bomb by hostile forces. Such a bomb uses conventional explosives in addition to radioactive material.
Most of the detonations were carried out in the desert and one was performed at a closed facility. The research concluded that high-level radiation was measured at the center of the explosions, with a low level of dispersal of radiation by particles carried by the wind. Sources at the reactor said this doesn’t pose a substantial danger beyond the psychological effect.
An additional concern stems from a radiological explosion in a closed space, which would then require that the area be closed off for an extended period until the effects of the radiation are eliminated.
In 2010, staff from the Dimona nuclear reactor began a series of tests, dubbed the “Green Field” project, designed to measure the consequences of the detonation of a dirty bomb in Israel. The project was concluded in 2014, and its research findings have been presented at scientific gatherings and on nuclear science databases. The researchers explained that the experiments were for defensive purposes and that they were not giving consideration to offensive aspects of the tests.
Public concern over radiological terrorism began after the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001 and the threat by representatives of Al-Qaida to use such weaponry against the United States. The radioactive material is available to the medical and industrial sectors, and those who threaten its use as a weapon aim to augment the damage and fear caused by an explosion by adding the threat of radiation to the mix.
No such device has ever been deployed by terrorists, but officials in Israel have prepared for such an eventuality. In 2006, the Health Ministry issued procedures on how to deal with such an event. The website of the Israel Defense Force’s Home Front Command also features an explanation on how to proceed if such an event were to occur.
In 2013, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon issued a warning at a meeting in Canada in which he said the Iranians were interested in advancing the commission of terrorist activity, including use of a dirty bomb, against various Western targets under the nuclear umbrella that they were seeking to acquire, and the world should not show tolerance toward the prospect of a nuclear Iran.
In the course of the experiments, 20 detonations were carried out involving between 250 grams and 25 kilograms of explosives together with the common radioactive substance known as 99mTc, which is used in the health care field for medical imaging. The experiments made use of the reactor’s most innovative technology, including tiny drones used to measure radiation and sensors to measure the force of the blast.
In the course of the project, there was an additional test known as “Red House,” designed to examine another kind of radiological scenario in which a substance would be left in a crowded public space but not exploded. In the experiment, which was conducted together with the Home Front Command, six tests were made using material mixed with water in the ventilation system of a two-story building on a Home Front Command base, simulating a shopping mall. The result of the research was that such an approach is not effective from the terrorists’ perspective, and that most of the radiation remained on the air conditioning filters.
A series of experiments have been conducted by Israel to examine the effects of and damage caused by so-called "dirty" bombs, a combination of conventional explosive and radioactive materials. The tests were part of the "Green Field" project over the past four years at the nuclear reactor in Dimona. The project supervisors insisted that the objectives were defensive rather than offensive.
According to Haaretz, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in the USA concerns grew about the possibility of terrorist gaining access to "dirty" bombs, as threatened by Al-Qaeda at the time. Such threats have not materialised. Israel, however, has been conducting the tests to see what might happen in the event that such a weapon is used.
In 2006, the Israeli Ministry of Health issued instructions about the treatment necessary if dirty bombs were deployed against targets in the country. The experiments started in Dimona in 2010 and ended last year; their findings were published in scientific circles. Twenty bombs weighing between a quarter kilogram and 25 kilogram mixed with "Technetium-99m", which is used in the pharmaceutical industry, were built for the programme of tests.
It was discovered that there was a very high rate of radiation in the centre of the explosion as well as small amounts dispersed by the wind in the surrounding areas. However, the conclusion from the research suggests that the fundamental danger associated with such bombs compared with "regular" munitions is connected more with the psychological impact on the public.
Haaretz exclusive: Israel tested 'dirty-bomb cleanup' in the desert
Series of tests in conjunction with four-year project at Dimona nuclear reactor measured damage and other implications of detonation of radiological weapon by hostile forces.
Israel recently carried out a series of tests in the desert in conjunction with a four-year project at the Dimona nuclear reactor to measure the damage and other implications of the detonation of a so-called “dirty” radiological bomb by hostile forces. Such a bomb uses conventional explosives in addition to radioactive material.
Most of the detonations were carried out in the desert and one was performed at a closed facility. The research concluded that high-level radiation was measured at the center of the explosions, with a low level of dispersal of radiation by particles carried by the wind. Sources at the reactor said this doesn’t pose a substantial danger beyond the psychological effect.
An additional concern stems from a radiological explosion in a closed space, which would then require that the area be closed off for an extended period until the effects of the radiation are eliminated.
In 2010, staff from the Dimona nuclear reactor began a series of tests, dubbed the “Green Field” project, designed to measure the consequences of the detonation of a dirty bomb in Israel. The project was concluded in 2014, and its research findings have been presented at scientific gatherings and on nuclear science databases. The researchers explained that the experiments were for defensive purposes and that they were not giving consideration to offensive aspects of the tests.
Public concern over radiological terrorism began after the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001 and the threat by representatives of Al-Qaida to use such weaponry against the United States. The radioactive material is available to the medical and industrial sectors, and those who threaten its use as a weapon aim to augment the damage and fear caused by an explosion by adding the threat of radiation to the mix.
No such device has ever been deployed by terrorists, but officials in Israel have prepared for such an eventuality. In 2006, the Health Ministry issued procedures on how to deal with such an event. The website of the Israel Defense Force’s Home Front Command also features an explanation on how to proceed if such an event were to occur.
In 2013, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon issued a warning at a meeting in Canada in which he said the Iranians were interested in advancing the commission of terrorist activity, including use of a dirty bomb, against various Western targets under the nuclear umbrella that they were seeking to acquire, and the world should not show tolerance toward the prospect of a nuclear Iran.
In the course of the experiments, 20 detonations were carried out involving between 250 grams and 25 kilograms of explosives together with the common radioactive substance known as 99mTc, which is used in the health care field for medical imaging. The experiments made use of the reactor’s most innovative technology, including tiny drones used to measure radiation and sensors to measure the force of the blast.
In the course of the project, there was an additional test known as “Red House,” designed to examine another kind of radiological scenario in which a substance would be left in a crowded public space but not exploded. In the experiment, which was conducted together with the Home Front Command, six tests were made using material mixed with water in the ventilation system of a two-story building on a Home Front Command base, simulating a shopping mall. The result of the research was that such an approach is not effective from the terrorists’ perspective, and that most of the radiation remained on the air conditioning filters.
23 may 2015
US blocks global document aimed at ridding world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to 'cynically manipulate' the process by setting deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked US Secretary of State John Kerry for blocking an Egyptian-led drive on a possible Middle East nuclear arms ban at a United Nations conference, an Israeli official said on Saturday.
It was a rare message of thanks from Netanyahu, who has repeatedly accused President Barack Obama of undermining Israel's security by attempting to reach a nuclear deal with Iran.
The United States on Friday blocked a global document aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to "cynically manipulate" the process by setting a deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months on a Middle East zone free of such weapons.
The now-failed final document of a landmark treaty review conference had called on the UN secretary-general to convene the Middle East conference no later than March 2016, regardless of whether Israel and its neighbors agree on an agenda.
Israel is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never publicly declared what is widely considered to be an extensive nuclear weapons program. A conference might force Israel to acknowledge it. Netanyahu spoke with Kerry "to convey his appreciation to President Obama and to the Secretary," a senior Israeli official said on condition of anonymity.
"The United States kept its commitment to Israel by preventing a Middle East resolution that would single out Israel and ignore its security interests and the threats posed to it by an increasingly turbulent Middle East," the official added. Israel also thanked Britain and Canada for joining the United States in blocking consensus at the conference, the official said.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon voiced disappointment that NPT parties were "unable to narrow their differences on the future of nuclear disarmament or to arrive at a new collective vision on how to achieve a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction (WMD)."
Since adopting a final document requires consensus, the rejection by the United States, backed by Britain and Canada, means the entire blueprint for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation for the next five years has been blocked after four weeks of negotiations. The next treaty review conference is in 2020. That has alarmed countries without nuclear weapons, who are increasingly frustrated by what they see as the slow pace of nuclear-armed countries to disarm.
The United States and Russia hold more than 90 percent of the estimated 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world today. Amid a growing movement that stresses the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, Austria announced that 107 states have now signed a pledge calling for legal measures to ban and eliminate them.
The US comments Friday came after a top State Department official was dispatched to Israel this week for intense talks, as Israel protested the idea of being forced into a conference with its Arab neighbors without prior agreement on an agenda. Israel had been furious when the US at the treaty review conference five years ago signed off on a document that called for talks on a Middle East nuclear-free zone by 2012. Those talks never took place.
The language on the final document rejected Friday was "incompatible with our long-standing policies," said Rose Gottemoeller, the US under secretary of state for arms control and international security. She named Egypt as being one of the countries "not willing to let go of these unrealistic and unworkable conditions."
Egypt later said it was extremely disappointed and warned, "This will have consequences in front of the Arab world and public opinion."
Iran, speaking for a group of more than 100 mostly developing countries, said it was surprised to see the US, Britain and Canada willing to block the entire document in defense of a country that it said has endangered the region by not agreeing to safeguards for its nuclear program. Israel has been a fierce critic of the current efforts of world powers to negotiate an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, which Iran says is for peaceful purposes only.
Gottemoeller also pointed out that the 2010 mandate to hold a conference on a Middle East nuclear-free zone has now effectively expired. The head of the Russian delegation, Mikhail Ulyanov, noted the setback, saying it was "a shame that an opportunity for dialogue has to be missed, perhaps for a long time to come."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked US Secretary of State John Kerry for blocking an Egyptian-led drive on a possible Middle East nuclear arms ban at a United Nations conference, an Israeli official said on Saturday.
It was a rare message of thanks from Netanyahu, who has repeatedly accused President Barack Obama of undermining Israel's security by attempting to reach a nuclear deal with Iran.
The United States on Friday blocked a global document aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to "cynically manipulate" the process by setting a deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months on a Middle East zone free of such weapons.
The now-failed final document of a landmark treaty review conference had called on the UN secretary-general to convene the Middle East conference no later than March 2016, regardless of whether Israel and its neighbors agree on an agenda.
Israel is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never publicly declared what is widely considered to be an extensive nuclear weapons program. A conference might force Israel to acknowledge it. Netanyahu spoke with Kerry "to convey his appreciation to President Obama and to the Secretary," a senior Israeli official said on condition of anonymity.
"The United States kept its commitment to Israel by preventing a Middle East resolution that would single out Israel and ignore its security interests and the threats posed to it by an increasingly turbulent Middle East," the official added. Israel also thanked Britain and Canada for joining the United States in blocking consensus at the conference, the official said.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon voiced disappointment that NPT parties were "unable to narrow their differences on the future of nuclear disarmament or to arrive at a new collective vision on how to achieve a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction (WMD)."
Since adopting a final document requires consensus, the rejection by the United States, backed by Britain and Canada, means the entire blueprint for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation for the next five years has been blocked after four weeks of negotiations. The next treaty review conference is in 2020. That has alarmed countries without nuclear weapons, who are increasingly frustrated by what they see as the slow pace of nuclear-armed countries to disarm.
The United States and Russia hold more than 90 percent of the estimated 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world today. Amid a growing movement that stresses the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, Austria announced that 107 states have now signed a pledge calling for legal measures to ban and eliminate them.
The US comments Friday came after a top State Department official was dispatched to Israel this week for intense talks, as Israel protested the idea of being forced into a conference with its Arab neighbors without prior agreement on an agenda. Israel had been furious when the US at the treaty review conference five years ago signed off on a document that called for talks on a Middle East nuclear-free zone by 2012. Those talks never took place.
The language on the final document rejected Friday was "incompatible with our long-standing policies," said Rose Gottemoeller, the US under secretary of state for arms control and international security. She named Egypt as being one of the countries "not willing to let go of these unrealistic and unworkable conditions."
Egypt later said it was extremely disappointed and warned, "This will have consequences in front of the Arab world and public opinion."
Iran, speaking for a group of more than 100 mostly developing countries, said it was surprised to see the US, Britain and Canada willing to block the entire document in defense of a country that it said has endangered the region by not agreeing to safeguards for its nuclear program. Israel has been a fierce critic of the current efforts of world powers to negotiate an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, which Iran says is for peaceful purposes only.
Gottemoeller also pointed out that the 2010 mandate to hold a conference on a Middle East nuclear-free zone has now effectively expired. The head of the Russian delegation, Mikhail Ulyanov, noted the setback, saying it was "a shame that an opportunity for dialogue has to be missed, perhaps for a long time to come."
Conference
on Non-Proliferation Treaty fails after disagreements on atomic
weapons ban in the Middle East, which the US blames on Egypt.
A month-long review conference on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ended in failure on Friday after its members were unable to overcome disagreements on an atomic weapons ban for the Middle East, which the United States blamed on Egypt.
After four weeks of negotiations at the United Nations on ways to improve compliance with the pact, there was no consensus among its 191 signatories. US Under Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller announced there was "no agreement" and accused some countries of undermining the negotiations.
Gottemoeller did not say which nations had tried to "cynically manipulate" the conference, though she accused Egypt and other Arab states of bringing "unrealistic and unworkable conditions" to the negotiations.
A senior Western diplomat was more blunt: "Egypt wrecked the conference. ... Egypt overshot the runway and has prevented the region from moving closer to a region free of (weapons of mass destruction)."
Egypt denied trying to wreck the conference.
The US concerns were echoed by Canada and Britain. Cairo's top delegate, Assistant Foreign Minister Hashim Badr, blamed Washington, London and Ottawa for the failure to achieve consensus, saying it was a "sad day for the NPT."
Last month, Egypt, backed by other Arab and non-aligned states, proposed that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon convene a regional conference on banning weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as called for at the 2010 NPT review. The conference would be with or without Israel's participation, without agreement on an agenda and with no discussion of regional security issues.
Those conditions are unacceptable to Israel and Washington.
Decisions at NPT review conferences, which are held every five years, are made by consensus.
Israel neither confirms nor denies the widespread assumption that it controls the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal. Israel, which has never joined the NPT, agreed to take part in the review meeting as an observer, ending a 20-year absence.
The call for a 2012 conference on a regional WMD ban, approved at the 2010 NPT review meeting, infuriated Israel. But diplomats said Israel eventually agreed to attend planning meetings. The 2012 conference never took place, which annoyed Egypt and other Arab states.
Egypt's proposals, Western diplomats say, were intended to focus attention on Israel. Washington and Israel say Iran's nuclear program is the real regional threat.
Iran says its program is peaceful. It is negotiating with world powers to curb it in exchange for lifting sanctions.
Israel has said it would consider joining the NPT only once at peace with its Arab neighbors and Iran.
Proliferation talks fail over Mideast nuke plan
Nuclear non-proliferation talks ended without agreement on Friday after the United States, Canada and Britain opposed a plan to set up a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
More than 150 countries took part in a month-long conference reviewing the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which seeks to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and technology. But talks on a final document outlining an action plan for the next five years hit a wall over a provision on convening a conference by March 2016 on creating a Middle East nuclear-weapons free zone.
Israel attended the conference as an observer and opposed the proposal backed by Egypt and Arab countries. The Pentagon released documents in February 2015 confirming Israel as a nuclear power, believed to be the the only country in the Middle East holding nuclear weapons.
Israel but has never publicly acknowledged the fact and is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
US Arms Control Under Secretary Rose Gottemoeller told the NPT conference that provisions on holding the conference were "incompatible with our long-standing policies." Gottemoeller argued that the proposed nuclear-free zone did not stand a chance of success "absent the consent of all states involved," a clear reference to Israel's opposition.
Earlier this week, the US administration had dispatched an envoy to Israel to discuss the proposal, hoping to reach a compromise that would have salvaged the final document of the NPT conference.
US blames Egypt
Gottemoeller took aim at "a number of states, in particular Egypt" for the failure of the talks, accusing them of refusing to "let go of unrealistic and unworkable conditions" to create the nuclear weapons-free zone.The head of the British delegation to the talks, Matthew Rowland, also said the terms for convening the conference on the nuclear weapons-free zone were "a stumbling block for us."
Canada said it could not agree to the document because of the provisions that would have laid the groundwork for creating the zone banning all nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
In an eleventh-hour move, Iran, which heads the non-aligned movement, requested more time to consider the final document but the session resumed with no agreement. Iran's envoy cited the refusal of "three delegations" to agree to the final text, accusing them of blocking the consensus "with this high cost."
The envoy said this was "only to safeguard the interest of a particular non-party to the treaty that has endangered peace and security in the region by developing a nuclear capability."
At the last NPT conference in 2010, a final document called for the conference on the nuclear-free weapons zone for the Middle East to be held in 2012, but that meeting never materialized.
The NPT, which entered into force in 1970, has 190 state-parties or entities that meet every five years to take stock of progress in nuclear disarmament.
The treaty is seen as a grand bargain between the five nuclear powers and non-nuclear states which agreed to give up atomic weapon ambitions in exchange for disarmament pledges. But non-nuclear states have been increasingly frustrated by the slow pace of disarmament and had sought during the month-long conference to press for action to speed up the reduction of stockpiles.
A month-long review conference on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ended in failure on Friday after its members were unable to overcome disagreements on an atomic weapons ban for the Middle East, which the United States blamed on Egypt.
After four weeks of negotiations at the United Nations on ways to improve compliance with the pact, there was no consensus among its 191 signatories. US Under Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller announced there was "no agreement" and accused some countries of undermining the negotiations.
Gottemoeller did not say which nations had tried to "cynically manipulate" the conference, though she accused Egypt and other Arab states of bringing "unrealistic and unworkable conditions" to the negotiations.
A senior Western diplomat was more blunt: "Egypt wrecked the conference. ... Egypt overshot the runway and has prevented the region from moving closer to a region free of (weapons of mass destruction)."
Egypt denied trying to wreck the conference.
The US concerns were echoed by Canada and Britain. Cairo's top delegate, Assistant Foreign Minister Hashim Badr, blamed Washington, London and Ottawa for the failure to achieve consensus, saying it was a "sad day for the NPT."
Last month, Egypt, backed by other Arab and non-aligned states, proposed that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon convene a regional conference on banning weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as called for at the 2010 NPT review. The conference would be with or without Israel's participation, without agreement on an agenda and with no discussion of regional security issues.
Those conditions are unacceptable to Israel and Washington.
Decisions at NPT review conferences, which are held every five years, are made by consensus.
Israel neither confirms nor denies the widespread assumption that it controls the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal. Israel, which has never joined the NPT, agreed to take part in the review meeting as an observer, ending a 20-year absence.
The call for a 2012 conference on a regional WMD ban, approved at the 2010 NPT review meeting, infuriated Israel. But diplomats said Israel eventually agreed to attend planning meetings. The 2012 conference never took place, which annoyed Egypt and other Arab states.
Egypt's proposals, Western diplomats say, were intended to focus attention on Israel. Washington and Israel say Iran's nuclear program is the real regional threat.
Iran says its program is peaceful. It is negotiating with world powers to curb it in exchange for lifting sanctions.
Israel has said it would consider joining the NPT only once at peace with its Arab neighbors and Iran.
Proliferation talks fail over Mideast nuke plan
Nuclear non-proliferation talks ended without agreement on Friday after the United States, Canada and Britain opposed a plan to set up a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
More than 150 countries took part in a month-long conference reviewing the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which seeks to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and technology. But talks on a final document outlining an action plan for the next five years hit a wall over a provision on convening a conference by March 2016 on creating a Middle East nuclear-weapons free zone.
Israel attended the conference as an observer and opposed the proposal backed by Egypt and Arab countries. The Pentagon released documents in February 2015 confirming Israel as a nuclear power, believed to be the the only country in the Middle East holding nuclear weapons.
Israel but has never publicly acknowledged the fact and is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.
US Arms Control Under Secretary Rose Gottemoeller told the NPT conference that provisions on holding the conference were "incompatible with our long-standing policies." Gottemoeller argued that the proposed nuclear-free zone did not stand a chance of success "absent the consent of all states involved," a clear reference to Israel's opposition.
Earlier this week, the US administration had dispatched an envoy to Israel to discuss the proposal, hoping to reach a compromise that would have salvaged the final document of the NPT conference.
US blames Egypt
Gottemoeller took aim at "a number of states, in particular Egypt" for the failure of the talks, accusing them of refusing to "let go of unrealistic and unworkable conditions" to create the nuclear weapons-free zone.The head of the British delegation to the talks, Matthew Rowland, also said the terms for convening the conference on the nuclear weapons-free zone were "a stumbling block for us."
Canada said it could not agree to the document because of the provisions that would have laid the groundwork for creating the zone banning all nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
In an eleventh-hour move, Iran, which heads the non-aligned movement, requested more time to consider the final document but the session resumed with no agreement. Iran's envoy cited the refusal of "three delegations" to agree to the final text, accusing them of blocking the consensus "with this high cost."
The envoy said this was "only to safeguard the interest of a particular non-party to the treaty that has endangered peace and security in the region by developing a nuclear capability."
At the last NPT conference in 2010, a final document called for the conference on the nuclear-free weapons zone for the Middle East to be held in 2012, but that meeting never materialized.
The NPT, which entered into force in 1970, has 190 state-parties or entities that meet every five years to take stock of progress in nuclear disarmament.
The treaty is seen as a grand bargain between the five nuclear powers and non-nuclear states which agreed to give up atomic weapon ambitions in exchange for disarmament pledges. But non-nuclear states have been increasingly frustrated by the slow pace of disarmament and had sought during the month-long conference to press for action to speed up the reduction of stockpiles.
22 may 2015
F-35 stealth fighter jet, a possible price for Israeli silence on Iran
Israeli officials are divided over when to ask for American war machines, and which, in return for acquiescence on the Iranian nuclear deal; meanwhile, US officials are asking, 'Where has Israel's schnorrer culture gone?'
The Foreign Ministry, intelligence community and even AIPAC believe that the deal with Iran over its nuclear program is done, and even the US Congress will not be able to stop it from being signed. As such, they now believe it might be time to shift gears.
Officials in Jerusalem have now realized that instead of continuing to fight a lost cause, Israel has another route that could help secure its interests – namely, asking the US for compensation in the form of expensive weapons or other benefits. The current debate among these officials is over which way Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should go – whether he should accept the deal through gritted teeth and demand a high price for acquiescence in the form of expensive weaponry, or continue to fight it.
A senior State Department official told Ynet's sister-publication Yedioth Ahronoth: "The White House is willing to pay a hefty price to get some quiet from the Israelis at this point. We are surprised the demand has not been made. Where has Israel's famous schnorrer culture gone?"
Firstly, regarding Israel's attempt to thwart the agreement through Congress and the Senate. The Senate voted recently to pass a draft resolution allowing it to place restrictions on the agreement the administration is due to sign in July. However, this is seen as a decision in principle only, and even President Obama announced he has no opposition.
The bill's opponents were unsuccessful in passing an amendment requiring any agreement to be submitted to the Senate as a treaty. Under the constitution, that would require approval of two-thirds of the Senate.
One of the most pivotal and vocal senators working against the Iran nuclear deal was former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez.
The bill's opponents, including those in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office, had hoped that Menendez would be able to stop the bill from passing, mainly because he was a key Democrat willing to speak out against the White House, but a recent corruption investigation opened against Menendez by the US Justice Department caused those hopes to diminish.
In light of the investigation, Menendez announced on April 1 that he was suspending himself from the Foreign Relations Committee. "With his departure from the scene, at least at this time, the most important engine working against the signing of the deal has disappeared," said a Senate staffer.
A journalist who regularly covers the White House and asked not to be named said that over the past four weeks, there has been a change in tone with regards to Netanyahu.
"It is not because all of a sudden they love the prime minister of Israel there, or because they want to have another go at bringing peace to the Middle East," he said. "But rather because, in their eyes, everything must be done to get the deal with Iran approved, if and when the remaining details that were left out of the outline signed in Switzerland are agreed upon."
The White House is ready to seriously consider significant compensation for Israel if it does not too strenuously oppose the deal at present.
Israeli officials are divided over when to ask for American war machines, and which, in return for acquiescence on the Iranian nuclear deal; meanwhile, US officials are asking, 'Where has Israel's schnorrer culture gone?'
The Foreign Ministry, intelligence community and even AIPAC believe that the deal with Iran over its nuclear program is done, and even the US Congress will not be able to stop it from being signed. As such, they now believe it might be time to shift gears.
Officials in Jerusalem have now realized that instead of continuing to fight a lost cause, Israel has another route that could help secure its interests – namely, asking the US for compensation in the form of expensive weapons or other benefits. The current debate among these officials is over which way Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should go – whether he should accept the deal through gritted teeth and demand a high price for acquiescence in the form of expensive weaponry, or continue to fight it.
A senior State Department official told Ynet's sister-publication Yedioth Ahronoth: "The White House is willing to pay a hefty price to get some quiet from the Israelis at this point. We are surprised the demand has not been made. Where has Israel's famous schnorrer culture gone?"
Firstly, regarding Israel's attempt to thwart the agreement through Congress and the Senate. The Senate voted recently to pass a draft resolution allowing it to place restrictions on the agreement the administration is due to sign in July. However, this is seen as a decision in principle only, and even President Obama announced he has no opposition.
The bill's opponents were unsuccessful in passing an amendment requiring any agreement to be submitted to the Senate as a treaty. Under the constitution, that would require approval of two-thirds of the Senate.
One of the most pivotal and vocal senators working against the Iran nuclear deal was former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, New Jersey Democrat Robert Menendez.
The bill's opponents, including those in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office, had hoped that Menendez would be able to stop the bill from passing, mainly because he was a key Democrat willing to speak out against the White House, but a recent corruption investigation opened against Menendez by the US Justice Department caused those hopes to diminish.
In light of the investigation, Menendez announced on April 1 that he was suspending himself from the Foreign Relations Committee. "With his departure from the scene, at least at this time, the most important engine working against the signing of the deal has disappeared," said a Senate staffer.
A journalist who regularly covers the White House and asked not to be named said that over the past four weeks, there has been a change in tone with regards to Netanyahu.
"It is not because all of a sudden they love the prime minister of Israel there, or because they want to have another go at bringing peace to the Middle East," he said. "But rather because, in their eyes, everything must be done to get the deal with Iran approved, if and when the remaining details that were left out of the outline signed in Switzerland are agreed upon."
The White House is ready to seriously consider significant compensation for Israel if it does not too strenuously oppose the deal at present.
Iron Dome in action during Protective Edge. Israel may get another battery
The State Department source says that the subject of what Israel would demand has also been raised – and would receive - in assessments between the State Department and Pentagon, "to suit the new security situation in the region." One reasonable option concerns an increase in the number of F-35s that Israel will receive.
In February, Israeli Defense Ministry officials signed a deal for the sale of 14 more jets, in addition to the 19 already purchased in 2010, all at a average price of $110 million per plane.
Israel planned to buy another 17 planes, but in the wake of Israeli difficulties in raising the money, and opposition from cabinet ministers, it was classed as an "optional" purchase, and was never carried out. The State Department source says that the US will be ready to consider a "substantial subsidy" for some of these additional planes.
A second option is "generous" financial support for the purchase of more C-130J (Super Hercules) cargo air force jets. A third option – another Iron Dome battery courtesy of the American tax payer.
At the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry and Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem, officials acknowledge the American readiness to pay a heavy price for the Iran deal, but are in no rush to exact that price. A fierce argument is raging among officials regarding this issue.
A member of the Foreign Ministry puts it thusly: "If we come with demands at this stage, it will mean that we have effectively ended our opposition to the agreement, and it would only be a question of the price. If Israel is operating on the assumption that this is such a terrible deal for the security of the state, it cannot look like it ultimately capitulated."
On the other hand, sources in the Military Intelligence (AMAN) Research Division who deal with international affairs claim that the agreement is already a done deal and now is the time to get as much as possible for the security of the state. "If we present our demands only after the deal has been signed, and after we tried to scupper it in every way possible, the amount we can ask for will be far smaller, if anything".
Israel is indeed a master of the "schnorrer culture", as the State Department source put it. Take, for example, a discussion at the Defense Ministry on October 5, 1973, the eve of the Yom Kippur War. Then defense minister Moshe Dayan refused to get excited over warnings of a looming conflict, even raising the possibility of warning the Egyptians and Syrians that Israel knew about the impending war and would let them attack in order to annihilate them.
In return for Israel showing restraint, Dayan instructed Defense Ministry officials to prepare a list of equipment and weapons that Israel would demand from the United States immediately after the war ended.
Either way, Netanyahu has to rule in the coming weeks on this important dispute.
The State Department source says that the subject of what Israel would demand has also been raised – and would receive - in assessments between the State Department and Pentagon, "to suit the new security situation in the region." One reasonable option concerns an increase in the number of F-35s that Israel will receive.
In February, Israeli Defense Ministry officials signed a deal for the sale of 14 more jets, in addition to the 19 already purchased in 2010, all at a average price of $110 million per plane.
Israel planned to buy another 17 planes, but in the wake of Israeli difficulties in raising the money, and opposition from cabinet ministers, it was classed as an "optional" purchase, and was never carried out. The State Department source says that the US will be ready to consider a "substantial subsidy" for some of these additional planes.
A second option is "generous" financial support for the purchase of more C-130J (Super Hercules) cargo air force jets. A third option – another Iron Dome battery courtesy of the American tax payer.
At the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry and Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem, officials acknowledge the American readiness to pay a heavy price for the Iran deal, but are in no rush to exact that price. A fierce argument is raging among officials regarding this issue.
A member of the Foreign Ministry puts it thusly: "If we come with demands at this stage, it will mean that we have effectively ended our opposition to the agreement, and it would only be a question of the price. If Israel is operating on the assumption that this is such a terrible deal for the security of the state, it cannot look like it ultimately capitulated."
On the other hand, sources in the Military Intelligence (AMAN) Research Division who deal with international affairs claim that the agreement is already a done deal and now is the time to get as much as possible for the security of the state. "If we present our demands only after the deal has been signed, and after we tried to scupper it in every way possible, the amount we can ask for will be far smaller, if anything".
Israel is indeed a master of the "schnorrer culture", as the State Department source put it. Take, for example, a discussion at the Defense Ministry on October 5, 1973, the eve of the Yom Kippur War. Then defense minister Moshe Dayan refused to get excited over warnings of a looming conflict, even raising the possibility of warning the Egyptians and Syrians that Israel knew about the impending war and would let them attack in order to annihilate them.
In return for Israel showing restraint, Dayan instructed Defense Ministry officials to prepare a list of equipment and weapons that Israel would demand from the United States immediately after the war ended.
Either way, Netanyahu has to rule in the coming weeks on this important dispute.
21 may 2015
Israel announced on Wednesday that it rejects a Swiss court ruling to pay $1.1 billion to Iran over the sale and shipment of oil prior to the Iranian revolution in 1979.
"Without referring to the matter at hand," said the Israeli ministry of finance, "we'll note that according to the Trading with the Enemy Act it is forbidden to transfer money to the enemy, including the Iranian national oil company."
Israeli media quoted the official Iranian news agency, IRNA, which cited an "informed source" within Tehran's Presidential Centre for Legal Affairs giving details of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruling with regard to a "joint oil venture". Iran has been embroiled in a legal battle against Israel in courts in Switzerland and France, demanding that it should pay the debt.
The argument dates back to a 1968 agreement between Israel and the Shah's government. The Iranian Oil Company delivered 14.75m cubic metres of crude oil through the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline to Israel's Trans-Asiatic Oil Company valued at $450m.
Israel rules out any payment to 'enemy' Iran
Despite IRNA report of Swiss court ordering Trans-Asian Oil to pay $1.1 billion to Tehran's national oil company, Israeli finance ministry issues noncommittal statement saying it is prohibited from transferring funds to 'the enemy'.
After a Swiss court reportedly ordered an Israeli oil firm to compensate Iran over a scrapped joint venture, Israel said Thursday that its laws prohibited any payment to "the enemy."
Iranian state news agency IRNA said Wednesday that the court had found Israel's Trans-Asian Oil (TAO) liable for payment of $1.1 billion to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).
It said that NIOC and an Israeli company had signed an agreement in 1968 to transport Iranian oil to the Jewish state across the Red Sea. But after the 1979 Islamic revolution which overthrew Iran's pro-Western shah, the new regime cancelled the contract because it did not recognize the Jewish state.
Tehran says it was owed $450 million when the partnership ended. The Israeli finance ministry on Thursday issued a carefully-worded statement which neither confirmed nor denied the IRNA report.
"Without commenting on the substance of the matter, we should remember that in accordance with the laws on trading with the enemy, it is prohibited to transfer funds to the enemy, which includes the National Iranian Oil Company," it said.
"It is highly doubtful that Israel will actually pay the debt," said an expert quoted by Israeli defense analyst Yossi Melman in Maariv newspaper on Thursday. Israel considers Iran its deadly foe and accuses it of seeking to develop nuclear arms and of financing attacks by Gaza-based Hamas and by Lebanon's Hezbollah.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly compared the Islamic republic to Hitler's Nazis, while Tehran regards the Jewish State as "Little Satan" and its officials often incite anger against Israel.
The premier is an implacable foe of any easing of international sanctions on Tehran as part of a nascent deal meant to prevent it acquiring nuclear arms. In a January editorial, the left-leaning Haaretz daily wondered if Netanyahu's campaign to isolate Iran could be to some extent influenced by the festering financial dispute, which has been the subject of arbitration for two decades.
"The legal battle has kept the highest people in government very busy, but Israelis have been left in the dark," it wrote. "All this raises troubling questions. Do Israel’s efforts to impose international sanctions on Iran also stem from financial considerations, not just security ones? Are Israel and Iran conducting a dialogue through their lawyers and arbitrators behind the public threats that have led Israel to the brink of war with Iran?"
"Without referring to the matter at hand," said the Israeli ministry of finance, "we'll note that according to the Trading with the Enemy Act it is forbidden to transfer money to the enemy, including the Iranian national oil company."
Israeli media quoted the official Iranian news agency, IRNA, which cited an "informed source" within Tehran's Presidential Centre for Legal Affairs giving details of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruling with regard to a "joint oil venture". Iran has been embroiled in a legal battle against Israel in courts in Switzerland and France, demanding that it should pay the debt.
The argument dates back to a 1968 agreement between Israel and the Shah's government. The Iranian Oil Company delivered 14.75m cubic metres of crude oil through the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline to Israel's Trans-Asiatic Oil Company valued at $450m.
Israel rules out any payment to 'enemy' Iran
Despite IRNA report of Swiss court ordering Trans-Asian Oil to pay $1.1 billion to Tehran's national oil company, Israeli finance ministry issues noncommittal statement saying it is prohibited from transferring funds to 'the enemy'.
After a Swiss court reportedly ordered an Israeli oil firm to compensate Iran over a scrapped joint venture, Israel said Thursday that its laws prohibited any payment to "the enemy."
Iranian state news agency IRNA said Wednesday that the court had found Israel's Trans-Asian Oil (TAO) liable for payment of $1.1 billion to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).
It said that NIOC and an Israeli company had signed an agreement in 1968 to transport Iranian oil to the Jewish state across the Red Sea. But after the 1979 Islamic revolution which overthrew Iran's pro-Western shah, the new regime cancelled the contract because it did not recognize the Jewish state.
Tehran says it was owed $450 million when the partnership ended. The Israeli finance ministry on Thursday issued a carefully-worded statement which neither confirmed nor denied the IRNA report.
"Without commenting on the substance of the matter, we should remember that in accordance with the laws on trading with the enemy, it is prohibited to transfer funds to the enemy, which includes the National Iranian Oil Company," it said.
"It is highly doubtful that Israel will actually pay the debt," said an expert quoted by Israeli defense analyst Yossi Melman in Maariv newspaper on Thursday. Israel considers Iran its deadly foe and accuses it of seeking to develop nuclear arms and of financing attacks by Gaza-based Hamas and by Lebanon's Hezbollah.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly compared the Islamic republic to Hitler's Nazis, while Tehran regards the Jewish State as "Little Satan" and its officials often incite anger against Israel.
The premier is an implacable foe of any easing of international sanctions on Tehran as part of a nascent deal meant to prevent it acquiring nuclear arms. In a January editorial, the left-leaning Haaretz daily wondered if Netanyahu's campaign to isolate Iran could be to some extent influenced by the festering financial dispute, which has been the subject of arbitration for two decades.
"The legal battle has kept the highest people in government very busy, but Israelis have been left in the dark," it wrote. "All this raises troubling questions. Do Israel’s efforts to impose international sanctions on Iran also stem from financial considerations, not just security ones? Are Israel and Iran conducting a dialogue through their lawyers and arbitrators behind the public threats that have led Israel to the brink of war with Iran?"