Sunday, May 17, 2009

Twisting In The Nuclear Wind

North Korea has nuclear devices - and so has Pakistan, two states whose balance of power and power of unbalanced properties - in one instance a self-empowered, sado-masochistic muse of destructive entitlement, in the other a politically-conflicted state uncertain whether it can attain a measure of security hampered by the lethal forces of Islamofascism it had itself nurtured - worry the international community.

They represent a global headache whose impact has been raised a notch by the reality that a third nation ruled by religious-political fanatics is soon to join them.

Difficult in the extreme to ensure that rogue nations or nations whose underpinnings are so decidedly frail they may well join the growing ranks of the unpredictable fundamentalists whose ideologies grow them into threats to the rest of the humanity, do not attain to nuclear weaponry. It is, for the most part, the responsibly-governed, sanely executived nations who in good faith sign on to international codes meant to protect the global community, with rare exceptions.

Israel, herself a nuclear power, albeit officially undeclared, faces a belligerently overt threat to her existence by a neighbour boasting of its attainment of nuclear facilities, its entitlement to the same nuclear opportunities that respected, reliable, stable nations have attained, none of which would ever dream of threatening the existence of their neighbours, unprovoked, let alone with nuclear explosives. There is nothing, absolutely nothing that Israel can do to release herself from this threat.

To believe that if Israel gave up its (internationally illegal) presence in the West Bank, withdrew its self-protective troops from the Palestinian Territories, surrendered half of Jerusalem, offered unimaginable reparations to those Palestinians who fled the State of Israel in 1948 during the 'Nakbah', (in lieu of diluting the Jewish presence by accepting the 'right of return' of 6-million 'descendants') is delusional. It is the entirety of the geography, the very presence of Israel on "Islamic soil" that demands rectifying; the withdrawal of Israel by any means.

The United Nations, the European Union, the United States, Russia, China and the Arab League demand that Israel accept a 'peace plan' through the acceptance of a two-state solution whose details are mandated entirely by the Arab League and the Palestinians. Israel may have no say whatever in the details; no give-and-take, no bargaining for position, no trade, simply acceptance of what is being offered. And what is on offer is that the Arab states will accept Israel's presence and no longer be on a war-footing.

What is not on offer is their dedication to the removal from the equation of the Iranian threat, that of Syria, and their support, encouragement and funding of their proxy Islamist-jihad armies, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The new American administration has presented Israel with an entirely new relationship. Once completely supportive of Israel, the United States' administration has taken an arms-length stance, demanding Israel surrender to the 'inevitable'.

And take her chances that a fully nuclear-armed Iran will turn out to be more bluster than blast. Would the United States' administration take that risk for themselves? When Iraq's Saddam Hussein felt entitled to secure Kuwait as a vassal-state, did not the U.S. administration of Bush senior assemble an international force to beat back Iraq and rescue Kuwait? The very same issue that impelled the Americans to rescue Kuwait is involved in the Israel-Iran equation: energy security.

Israel is to be the sacrificial lamb. Oil exports are not to be interfered with. The Arab oil states proved once in history how worrisome for the West an oil embargo could be to their economies, and neither the U.S. nor the E.U. wishes to provoke an energy backlash from irate oil providers.

Labels: , , , ,

posted by Pieface @ Sunday, May 17, 2009

Follow @rheytah Tweet