FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Israel’s WMDs and the West’s Double Standard

A highly distinguished and carefully selected team of American scientists just concluded a thorough and consequential mission in Iraq. The declared objective was finding Iraq’s arsenals of weapons of mass destruction. But hidden within such a declaration, was the hope of unearthing a pretext for a calamitous war on Iraq that cost billions of dollars and the irreplaceable lives of thousands.

Shortly after David Kay, who headed the scientific crusade to Baghdad, briefed the US Senate and House of Representatives of his findings, or lack thereof, a declassified version of his report was released. Not only were no weapons found in Iraq, but the disposed Iraqi government, according to Kay, had no capacity to produce chemical warfare agents before the war. So much for the British government scare campaign alleging Iraq’s readiness to launch a global attack using its supposed weapons within 45 minutes upon order.

But as if the war party’s lack of sense was not enough, the response to Kay’s report has displayed a greater lack of shame. Australia’s Prime Minister, John Howard, responded by saying he had no regrets. “You make judgments on the basis of the information available at the time you are required to make those judgments, and the judgment was valid,” he said, arrogantly and in startling defiance of the facts, and with no remorse for thousands of Iraqis who perished by the war allies’ weapons, which, ironically were the closest in nature to the alleged weapons of mass destruction that Iraq did not even possess.

British Foreign Minister, Jack Straw’s statement appeared as if the man was referring to a completely different report than that of Kay, saying that the American group’s report “confirms how dangerous and deceitful the (Iraqi) regime was, and how the military action was indeed both justified and essential to remove the danger.”

US President George Bush, who was struck by the nightmarish, although imperative findings that most Americans – 53 percent according to a new CBS News-New York Times poll – are now doubtful of his Iraq war, too, continued to defy common sense. “This administration will deal with gathering dangers where we find them.” Although the ambiguity, albeit arrogance of Bush’s words compels no comment, they certainly raise an important subject. If what genuinely concerns Bush is “gathering dangers” then why not go after the big guns, who, in fact do possess such weapons, for example, Israel. Of course, most readers, whether opponents or proponents of US foreign policy in the Middle East understand the irony, needless to say, the impossibility of such a demand. And that is because deep within, most of us are convinced that the US foreign policy doesn’t follow a moral code, rather an immoral, imperial and self-sustaining ideology only aimed at rewarding its followers and crudely punishing its antagonists.

Those living outside this immoral dogma understand that well. One is Nelson Mandela. In an interview with the American Newsweek magazine back in September, Mandela raised a seemingly simple concern. He introduced that concern by stating that Bush’s objectives behind the war were motivated by the President’s desire to “please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America.” Then, he added, “but what we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody mentions that.”

At the time of Mandela’s statement, some were still functioning based on the premise that Iraq did indeed have such weapons. Kay just told us in his report that no weapons were found. But Kay’s report, or any other for that matter, leaves intact the solid and palpable fact that Israel has weapons of mass destruction.

Israel’s possession of such weapons is so well known a fact, it’s dubbed: “the world’s most well-known secret.” In a BBC report that was aired twice, first in March and then again on June, 2003, the show host begins his communiqué by asking fear-provoking questions: “Which country in the Middle East has undeclared Nuclear weaponry? .. Which country in the Middle East has no outside inspections? .. Which country jailed its nuclear whistleblower for 18 years? ..” The dramatic introduction was followed by an enlarged title page: “ISRAEL’S SECRET WEAPON.”

Israel’s refusal to approve the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, in addition to strong speculations that Israel owns up to 300 nuclear warheads and the Arab League’s most recent assertion to the International Atomic Energy Agency that Israel now has the capability of producing a hydrogen bomb, are all not enough to convince the United States and its war ‘coalition’ that Iran and Iraq aren’t the real ‘imminent’ danger.

The present hierarchy of power in the West, the neo-imperialism, of which Israel is an essential part, seems little concerned with logic and rationale when one of its members is the wrongdoer. Aside from that, it makes perfect since for Bush, Blair and Howard to chase after the phantoms of Iraq’s alleged weapons, not leaving an orchard near Baghdad thoroughly excavated, while Israel amasses a wealth of banned weapons, unscathed.

While the rational response to Israel’s heedlessness is as stern a demand to allow unhindered access to weapons inspectors and unconditional signing of the NPT, the exact opposite is taking place. The IAEA is ambushing Iran, who is a potential war target for the US, demanding “full disclosure” of its nuclear program. The agency has set October 31 as the “decisive” and “non-negotiable” deadline.

In the United States, in a mid-September press conference, White House spokesman Scott McClellan sounded the drums of war once more when he threatened to hold Syria “accountable” if it doesn’t cease harboring terrorists (or simply giving a safe haven for anti-Israeli Palestinian factions, who merely operate politically in Damascus). McClellan’s threat ‘coincided’ with a more blatant threat by John Bolton, the US under-secretary of State for Arms and Control and International Security, when he briefed a Congress Committee regarding Syria, saying, “In short, if the language of persuasion fails, these states (starting with Syria) must see and feel the logic of adverse consequences.” Of course, Israel is not one of “these states.”

Israel, whose level of comfort in the United States and its war allies’ unconditional patronage is at an all time high, too, had its own, time-honored method of responding to nit-picking media reports, like that of the occasionally, yet not always honest, BBC. Israel officially declared boycotting the British Broadcasting Company.

The production or use of weapons of mass destruction should be vehemently rejected, regardless of any rationalization, no matter how merited they might appear. When a nuclear bomb is dropped, or when nerve gas is discharge, neither the identity of the attacker nor the victim should be of essence. Equally, we should lend no sympathy to whether the pilot dropping the bomb is a citizen of a democratically elected government or assigned by a religious cleric. Not one should be allowed to produce or attain such massive killing agents, not Iran, not India and certainly not Israel.

One can strongly make the case that if one or more Middle Eastern countries are indeed pondering the probabilities of attaining weapons of mass destruction, it is, in part, because of the fear that its lack of such weapons can place it on the list of most vulnerable countries. It is not easy to scold or kick around a country with a fully functioning nuclear weapons system. The Pakistani response to India’s weaponry, and the North Korean admission to the possession of such weapons are all cases in point. By granting Israel the right to produce weapons that can be used for one purpose only, mass killing, then demanding Iran to cease the mere desire to produce them is the ultimate hypocrisy.

In the past, much of Israel’s actions were justified on the basis of the racist premise of Israel’s progressiveness and the Arab’s backwardness. The right to mass killing should not be equally justified according to the same premise, not by any stretch of the imagination, no matter how racist such an imagination may be.

RAMZY BAROUD is a Palestinian-American journalist and editor-in-chief of The Palestine Chronicle online newspaper. He is the editor of the anthology: “Searching Jenin: Eyewitness Accounts of the Israeli Invasion.”

 

More articles by:

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle. His latest book is The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story (Pluto Press, London, 2018). He earned a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and is a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies, UCSB.

February 19, 2019
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Troublesome Possibilities: The Left and Tulsi Gabbard
Patrick Cockburn
She Didn’t Start the Fire: Why Attack the ISIS Bride?
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Literature and Theater During War: Why Euripides Still Matters
Maximilian Werner
The Night of Terror: Wyoming Game and Fish’s Latest Attempt to Close the Book on the Mark Uptain Tragedy
Conn Hallinan
Erdogan is Destined for Another Rebuke in Turkey
Nyla Ali Khan
Politics of Jammu and Kashmir: The Only Viable Way is Forward
Mark Ashwill
On the Outside Looking In: an American in Vietnam
Joyce Nelson
Sir Richard Branson’s Venezuelan-Border PR Stunt
Ron Jacobs
Day of Remembrance and the Music of Anthony Brown        
Cesar Chelala
Women’s Critical Role in Saving the Environment
February 18, 2019
Paul Street
31 Actual National Emergencies
Robert Fisk
What Happened to the Remains of Khashoggi’s Predecessor?
David Mattson
When Grizzly Bears Go Bad: Constructions of Victimhood and Blame
Julian Vigo
USMCA’s Outsourcing of Free Speech to Big Tech
George Wuerthner
How the BLM Serves the West’s Welfare Ranchers
Christopher Fons
The Crimes of Elliot Abrams
Thomas Knapp
The First Rule of AIPAC Is: You Do Not Talk about AIPAC
Mitchel Cohen
A Tale of Two Citations: Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” and Michael Harrington’s “The Other America”
Jake Johnston
Haiti and the Collapse of a Political and Economic System
Dave Lindorff
It’s Not Just Trump and the Republicans
Laura Flanders
An End to Amazon’s Two-Bit Romance. No Low-Rent Rendezvous.
Patrick Walker
Venezuelan Coup Democrats Vomit on Green New Deal
Natalie Dowzicky
The Millennial Generation Will Tear Down Trump’s Wall
Nick Licata
Of Stress and Inequality
Joseph G. Ramsey
Waking Up on President’s Day During the Reign of Donald Trump
Elliot Sperber
Greater Than Food
Weekend Edition
February 15, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Matthew Hoh
Time for Peace in Afghanistan and an End to the Lies
Chris Floyd
Pence and the Benjamins: An Eternity of Anti-Semitism
Rob Urie
The Green New Deal, Capitalism and the State
Jim Kavanagh
The Siege of Venezuela and the Travails of Empire
Paul Street
Someone Needs to Teach These As$#oles a Lesson
Andrew Levine
World Historical Donald: Unwitting and Unwilling Author of The Green New Deal
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Third Rail-Roaded
Eric Draitser
Impacts of Exploding US Oil Production on Climate and Foreign Policy
Ron Jacobs
Maduro, Guaidó and American Exceptionalism
John Laforge
Nuclear Power Can’t Survive, Much Less Slow Climate Disruption
Joyce Nelson
Venezuela & The Mighty Wurlitzer
Jonathan Cook
In Hebron, Israel Removes the Last Restraint on Its Settlers’ Reign of Terror
Ramzy Baroud
Enough Western Meddling and Interventions: Let the Venezuelan People Decide
Robert Fantina
Congress, Israel and the Politics of “Righteous Indignation”
Dave Lindorff
Using Students, Teachers, Journalists and other Professionals as Spies Puts Everyone in Jeopardy
Kathy Kelly
What it Really Takes to Secure Peace in Afghanistan
Brian Cloughley
In Libya, “We Came, We Saw, He Died.” Now, Maduro?
Nicky Reid
The Councils Before Maduro!
Gary Leupp
“It’s All About the Benjamins, Baby”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail