M A Hossain,
Every year, billions of dollars are poured into global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Treaties are signed, sanctions imposed, and international inspectors deployed—all in the name of nuclear disarmament. But one glaring exception consistently escapes scrutiny- Israel. Why?
Despite widespread assumptions about Israel’s nuclear capability, the world remains curiously silent. While countries like Iran and North Korea face crippling sanctions and global condemnation for suspected or actual nuclear pursuits, Israel continues to enjoy immunity. The global non-proliferation regime, led by the United States and its Western allies, preaches equality under international law. Yet the treatment of Israel’s nuclear program reveals a dangerous hypocrisy that undermines both the credibility of this regime and the prospects for lasting peace in the Middle East.
The Evidence: Israel’s Nuclear Program:
Israel’s nuclear journey began quietly but decisively in the early 1950s with the formation of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission. It soon evolved into a full-fledged weapons program under the veil of strategic ambiguity. With critical assistance from France and the United States, Israel constructed the Dimona reactor in the Negev desert. By the late 1960s, experts believed the country had already produced its first nuclear bombs.
The world got its first real glimpse into this clandestine arsenal in 1986, when Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at the Dimona facility, revealed detailed information about Israel’s nuclear weapons to the British press. For his whistleblowing, Vanunu was abducted by Mossad in Rome, tried in secret, and imprisoned for 18 years, eleven of which were spent in solitary confinement. His story, a rare crack in the wall of Israel’s nuclear opacity, confirmed what many intelligence agencies had long suspected.
While Israel has never officially acknowledged its nuclear status, experts from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimate the country to possess around 80 to 200 nuclear warheads, including gravity bombs and missile warheads deliverable via air, land, and sea. The Federation of American Scientists corroborates this, suggesting Israel maintains a secure second-strike capability through submarine-launched cruise missiles. Some reports even suggest Israel may be developing thermonuclear weapons.
This unacknowledged yet highly advanced nuclear arsenal is an open secret. And yet, unlike Iran whose every enrichment cycle is scrutinized by the IAEA—Israel’s weapons remain shrouded in silence.
The Double Standard :
Israel’s nuclear opacity is not merely a domestic policy of silence; it is supported, if not orchestrated by an enduring international double standard. Consider the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the cornerstone of global nuclear arms control. Israel has never signed it. Under NPT rules, signatories who did not possess nuclear weapons before 1967 are forbidden from developing them. Had Israel joined, it would have had to disarm. Instead, it remained outside the treaty, free to develop its capabilities while demanding others comply.
This contrast is stark when compared with Iran, a signatory to the NPT that has subjected its facilities to regular inspections and declared its intent to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. And yet, Iran has faced devastating sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and the latest provoking unlawful military intervention of Israeli forces. Israel, on the other hand, is rewarded with over $3 billion in annual U.S. aid, military cooperation, and diplomatic shielding.
The roots of this preferential treatment go back to a secret 1969 understanding between U.S. President Richard Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir. The agreement essentially allowed Israel to keep its nuclear weapons as long as it remained silent about them and avoided nuclear tests. That bargain has held ever since, with successive U.S. administrations turning a blind eye to what would be a clear violation of international norms if committed by any other state.
Israeli allies argue that Israel’s unique security challenges, being surrounded by hostile neighbors—justify its nuclear deterrent. But if strategic insecurity grants nations a license to arm themselves with nuclear weapons, then the global non-proliferation regime is moot. Why deny this same logic to Tehran, Riyadh, or Cairo?
Consequences of the Silence:
The costs of this silence go far beyond moral inconsistency. By exempting Israel from the rules that bind others, the global community undermines the entire architecture of nuclear non-proliferation. The NPT operates on the principle of equality: states that forgo nuclear weapons are promised access to peaceful nuclear technology, while nuclear states commit to eventual disarmament. When one country is seen to be permanently exempt, others lose faith in the bargain. Why should Iran or Saudi Arabia restrain themselves when Israel’s nuclear monopoly is not only tolerated but protected?
This perceived injustice risks igniting a regional arms race. Already, Saudi Arabia has hinted at pursuing nuclear capabilities if Iran acquires them. Egypt, too, has voiced concern over Israel’s opacity and the lack of progress on a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East—a proposal that has been blocked repeatedly by Israel and the U.S.
The result is a region teetering on the brink. A nuclear-armed Middle East where rivalries are intense and trust is scarce—is a formula for disaster. Accidental escalation, miscalculation, or cyber sabotage could trigger a conflict with catastrophic consequences.
There is also the moral dimension. By ignoring Israel’s arsenal, the international community implicitly endorses a world where some nations are allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction while others are punished for merely aspiring to them. This sends a corrosive message: power, not principle, determines who gets to play by which rules.
Call to Action:
It is time to end this dangerous charade. Israel should be encouraged, if not compelled to come clean about its nuclear capabilities. While complete disarmament may be unrealistic in the near term, transparency is not. Acknowledging the existence of its arsenal would be a first step toward including Israel in regional arms control talks and eventually bringing it under the purview of international inspections.
The international community, especially the United States, must re-evaluate its complicity. Continued military aid and diplomatic cover for Israel's nuclear opacity is not only hypocritical but harmful to the broader U.S. interests in stability and non-proliferation.
Moreover, regional actors should intensify efforts to convene a dialogue on establishing a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Such a forum would not only address Israel’s arsenal but also create a framework to manage future threats and build trust among adversaries. Above all, the world must restore integrity to the principles of non-proliferation. Nuclear weapons are too dangerous to be governed by geopolitical favoritism.
Conclusion :
The global silence on Israel’s nuclear weapons is not a matter of oversight, it is a conscious policy born of strategic convenience and political cowardice. But this silence comes at a cost: global credibility, regional stability, and moral consistency.
If the international community is serious about preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, then it must be serious about enforcing the same rules for all. Otherwise, the message is clear: nuclear hypocrisy is not only tolerated—it is institutionalized. And the question that must haunt every diplomat and policymaker is this: How long can the world afford to play along?
M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. He can be reached at: writetomahossain@gmail.com
This article published at :
1. Eurasia Review, USA : 23 June, 25
2. Asian Age, BD : 25 June,25
3. Country Today, BD : 24 June,25
No comments:
Post a Comment