British archives show fears Israel could nuke Arab states

[freepalestine]

British archives show fears Israel could nuke Arab states
Published yesterday (updated) 30/12/2010 17:05
http://www.revleft.com/vb/images/ViewDetails/Eng-1.jpg http://www.revleft.com/vb/images/ViewDetails/Eng+1.jpg




A view for Bushehr Nuclear power station in the Persian Gulf
[MaanImages/ Payam Borazjani]

LONDON (AFP) - British diplomats feared Israel would use nuclear weapons in the event of another war with its Arab neighbors, secret files have shown.

In 1980, British officials were concerned that Israel could be heading for a new conflict, despite signing a peace treaty with Egypt the year before, according to official papers released from the National Archives after being kept secret for 30 years.

"The situation in the region is deteriorating and with it Israel's dangerous mood of isolation and defiance will grow," warned a cable from the British embassy in Tel Aviv, dated May 4.

"If they (Israel) are to be destroyed they will go down fighting this time. They will be ready to use their atomic weapon. Because they cannot sustain a long war, they would have to use it early."

Israel has never confirmed or denied reports that it has produced nuclear warheads.

The files also showed how prime minister Margaret Thatcher, elected to office the year before, found Middle East diplomacy exasperating.

She confided in then French president Valery Giscard d'Estaing that she "had never had a more difficult man to deal with" than Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin.

She had also tried to tell Begin that his policies towards Jewish settlement building on the West Bank were "unrealistic" and "absurd".

"His response was that Judea and Samaria had been Jewish in biblical times and that they should therefore be so today," she told Giscard d'Estaing.

Thatcher was also unimpressed by Foreign Office attempts to persuade her that the Palestine Liberation Organisation should not be seen as a "purely terrorist organisation", but also as a political movement.

"This analysis just doesn't stand up. It is riddled with inconsistencies," she scrawled on one briefing paper.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=346618

[Sensible Socialist]

They won't be stopped by American politicians. Some would be fine with, if not already desiring, Israel preemtively using a nuclear strike against Iran.

[~Spectre]

They won't be stopped by American politicians. Some would be fine with, if not already desiring, Israel preemtively using a nuclear strike against Iran.

The U.S. would not allow them to use a nuclear first strike.

[FreeFocus]

This isn't surprising, especially since the Yom Kippur War was the second-closest the world has come to nuclear war. Begin's comments do reveal the religious fanaticism of Israel. Zionism wasn't, and isn't, entirely secular (perhaps even not mostly, in terms of its justifications).

[gorillafuck]

Israel was too conservative for Margaret Thatcher?

Umm, yikes. Wow.

But as of right now the US would not let Israel nuke an Arab state.

[Sensible Socialist]

The U.S. would not allow them to use a nuclear first strike.
Who knows what would happen if they did. I'll guess we'd probably issue a verbal reprimand, even limiting (or cutting) ties, but do you believe we would send troops to stop the leadership of Israel?

If it can be construed as a neccessity, it could happen. In my opinion, if such a thing were to occur, the CIA and other government agencies would hasitly create a "terror plot" and arrest a record-number of individuals, all to prove that the nuclear strike was neccessary.

I don't think we can think in terms of conventional parameters when discussing a possible nuclear strike in the modern age.

[Rafiq]

Why would Israel nuke an Arab state? Besides Syria, I don't see any Arab states that are threats to Israel...

[piet11111]

Why would Israel nuke an Arab state? Besides Syria, I don't see any Arab states that are threats to Israel...

Iran is considered an existential threat to israel as its (in their eyes soon to be nuclear) missiles can reach them.
Then you have Lebanon where Hezbollah holds a lot of political clout.

And israel's bunker mentality probably makes them look at all the other arab country's as threats too.

[Rafiq]

Iran is considered an existential threat to israel as its (in their eyes soon to be nuclear) missiles can reach them.
Then you have Lebanon where Hezbollah holds a lot of political clout.

And israel's bunker mentality probably makes them look at all the other arab country's as threats too.

But Iran isn't an Arab state and is actually an enemy to most Arab states..

Actually Arabs in Iran are discriminated against as second class citizens.

And, Israel wouldn't nuke Lebanon because... Lebanon is too close to Israel, therefore a nuke would mean the radiation would spread to Israel.

I find it hard to believe Israel is going to nuke an Arab state.

[scourge007]

Why would Israel nuke an Arab state? Besides Syria, I don't see any Arab states that are threats to Israel...
Israel has a plan called the Samson Option. The Samson Option is basically Israel glassing the whole Middle East if the Israeli Air Force is destroyed or their borders are over run.

[~Spectre]

Who knows what would happen if they did. I'll guess we'd probably issue a verbal reprimand, even limiting (or cutting) ties, but do you believe we would send troops to stop the leadership of Israel?

The U.S. doesn't need to send troops. The US would use the IDF against Israel. Israel is a small state, and like any other hyper militarized small state, the U.S. could back a coup. There are plenty of hyper right wing zealots in the IDF that would be up for the task. The threat of cutting off U.S. weapons + a full naval blockade and backing the Arabs against Israel, + the incentive of more leeway in ethnically cleansing the Palestinians = the the Israeli military offing any coalition government.


If it can be construed as a neccessity, it could happen. In my opinion, if such a thing were to occur, the CIA and other government agencies would hasitly create a "terror plot" and arrest a record-number of individuals, all to prove that the nuclear strike was neccessary.
It would never be construed as a necessity. Nuclear explosions in Iran only serve to hurt U.S. interests. Besides the meltdown in the global economy that could occur with oil prices, it would lead to practically every state in the region acquiring Nuclear weaponry.

To back Israel in such a scenario would probably involve the U.S. having to engage in full military occupation of every oil producing state in the middle east. That's expensive and might be logistically impossible. It would be much cheaper to cut off the state that doesn't have oil (Israel).

Israel doesn't view Iran as an existential threat either in that sense. What Israeli leaders are really afraid of is that all the propaganda they've spent demonizing Iran might backfire, and cause a massive emigration out of Israel, should Iran have a confirmed nuclear weapon. That emigration means Arab Israelis out number Jewish Israelis a lot quicker, and vote out the Zionist government.