Israel, Iran and the bomb

Reading this week's Time magazine I was quite surprised by the interview with Shimon Peres in the 10 questions segment. [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2109787,00.html]

Question: Remind me, does Israel have nuclear weapons?

Answer: Look, Israel doesn't intend to introduce nuclear weapons, but if people are afraid that we have them, why not?

To me this reads as a claim that Israel does not hold nukes, which is a stronger refutement than usual as usually Israel spokerspersons take a stance of ambiguity.

More surprising is that this contradicts a press conference in Jordan 1998, reported in the Jerusalem Post [http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=44774]  where Peres stated that Israel had:

"built a nuclear option, not in order to have a Hiroshima but an Oslo."

Not many people really believe that Israel does not have a nuclear weapon programme, and it seems rather futile trying to deny it any more.

So why does Israel continue to deny the existence of WMDs.  Could it be that it makes it very difficult to question Iran's nuclear intentions?

I don't like the prospect of Iran holding WMDs but it makes it difficult for any country to take an even handed approach on this if they don't at the same time question Israel's nuclear programme.  And it certainly isn't acceptable for any western country to support an Israeli attack on Iran when both countries are allegedly carrying out nuclear programmes.

Further reading - Israel's weapons of mass destruction - May 2005

Scrapping Trident should be more than about saving money

The Liberal Democrats seem to be gaining quite a lot of support by their proposal to scrap Trident, but if you look into their policies further, you will find that they still wish to keep our nuclear 'deterrent', and the main reason for scrapping Trident is about saving money.

Their policy reads:

Liberal Democrats do not believe that the UK can afford the billions of pounds the Government wants to spend on a like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system. Full-scale Trident is a cold war system that we no longer need nor can afford. We believe that less expensive alternatives should be considered.

While it is correct that Trident is a waste of money, which we cannot afford at the moment, this should not be the motivator for scrapping Trident.

The Green Party policy is very clear, saying:

Not replace Trident.We cannot conceive of any circumstances in which we would use these expensive and immoral weapons; we would decommission the existing system and not renew it.

As a child I remember seeing the following 'Protect and Survive' public information film, and it scared the hell out of me.  Since then I have been vehemently against the ownership of nuclear weapons and do not believe there is any justification in keeping them.



No country should have the right to own such weapons of mass destruction.  To use the is illegal under international law, as the kill indiscrimately.

We are also hypocrites to keep our own weapons and demand that other countries should not hold them.

If we want to be brokers for peace in the world we should ditch our nuclear programme now and lead by example.