Tag: Israel
Nukes could make things worse
Today the journal Survival: Global Politics and Strategy published a paper on “Assessing Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East.” I prepared it with two talented MEI research assistants, Aya Khan and Zuha Noor.
I have been concerned with nuclear issues since even before my professional career. My first participation in public protests was against fallout from nuclear weapons tests in the late 1950s and early 1960s. I wrote my doctoral thesis at Princeton on the history of radiation protection. When I joined the State Department in 1977, it was as a science and technology specialist. I spent seven years abroad as a Science Attache’ and Counselor in the US embassies in Rome and Brasilia. My main concern was Italian and Brazilian transfers to Iraq, as well as the possible military goals of the Brazilian nuclear program. I’ve visited many nuclear labs, reprocessing facilities, and power plants.
Nonproliferation in the Middle East
One of the interesting questions about the Middle East is why there has been little proliferation there in recent decades, despite the presence in the region of Israel’s nuclear weapons. Part of the answer is that Israel destroyed facilities in Iraq (1981) and Syria (2007) that might have allowed those countries to develop nuclear weapons. Libya, under American pressure, abandoned its nuclear program (2003). But why haven’t the heavier weights in the region, namely Turkey and Saudi Arabia, gone the nuclear route along with Iran?
This is an especially pertinent question right now, as Tehran approaches the nuclear threshold, at which it will have enough highly enriched uranium to build one or more nuclear weapons. The answer is at least in part that until recently Turkiye and Saudi Arabia have been largely content to rely on US security guarantees. Turkiye is a NATO member and has US nuclear weapons stationed on its territory. Saudi Arabia has until recently regarded the US as a reliable security partner. Ankara and Riyadh complain loudly about Israeli nuclear weapons, but so far as we know they have not tried to reply with nuclear weapons programs of their own.
Things are changing
But the strategic environment is changing for both of those countries. Turkiye and the US are trapped in frictions over Ankara’s purchase of Russian air defenses, the American reaction to (and alleged role in) the 2016 attempted coup, and Turkiye’s hostility to the Kurds who are allied with the Americans in Syria. Saudi Arabia resents the American failure to react strongly to the 2019 Iranian attack on its oil production facilities. Nor did it like President Biden’s criticism of Saudi human rights abuses and American efforts to lower oil prices. Security guarantees that once seemed ironclad are now doubtful.
At the same time, Russia and China are making inroads in the Middle East. Moscow has collaborated with Saudi Arabia in maintaining oil prices the Americans think too high. China is importing a lot of Saudi oil and offering to build nuclear power reactors in the Kingdom. Beijing has also mediated an agreement to restore diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Tehran. Rosatom is building nuclear reactors in Turkiye. Russia and China both have good reasons to fear nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. But is not clear that they will be as exigent on that score as the Americans.
Rosatom is also building power reactors in Egypt.
Leadership matters
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and President Erdogan have both said that if Iran gets nuclear weapons their countries will follow suit. It is not clear whether deeds have followed those words. Saudi Arabia’s technological capabilities in that direction may be limited. It only recently started up its first research reactor and is thought to be seeking US nuclear power reactors, which come with strong nonproliferation constraints. But we really don’t know. The Kingdom is opaque in that direction. The Turks are likely farther advanced, as they have had research reactors for many years. But there is no public evidence of enrichment or reprocessing research in Turkiye.
Egypt’s President Sisi has said his country doesn’t need to have nuclear weapons to achieve great power status. But what will he do if Turkiye or Saudi Arabia acquire nuclear weapons? And what will his successor do in that case?
Prevention is better than cure
My colleagues and I argue in our piece that prevention is better than cure. We need to be monitoring the nuclear capabilities of possible nuclear proliferators assiduously as well as building a regional security architecture that discourages nuclear weapons. We will also need to collaborate with Europe, Russia, and China in ensuring that other Middle Eastern states don’t follow Israel and Iran down the nuclear path. The Middle East is already a mess. Nuclear weapons would make things worse.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Politics won’t wait for a court decision
Donald Trump’s indictment dominates the news today and will remain a major issue until a plea bargain or verdict. The Republicans are claiming it is politically motivated and unjustified. The Democrats are claiming it is a response to malfeasance and an assertion of the rule of law.
What we don’t know
The truth is we don’t even know what he stands accused of. The grand jury that indicted him holds its proceedings in secret. Only at his arraignment next week will we learn the charges for certain.
These might be, as the Republicans are claiming, election law violations associated with his hush money payments to a porn star in 2016. Or, as many Democrats believe, they may involve business fraud related to those same payments, which were allegedly recorded in his company books as legal fees and laundered through his personal attorney.
No one knows at this point. It might be wise to refrain from comment on the charges until they become public.
What we do know
No other American president has ever been indicted. Nixon resigned to avoid impeachment. Any number of presidents have been guilty of malfeasance, before, during, and after their time in office. But the nation’s prosecutors have not seen fit to drag them into court. This is the basis of the argument that Trump’s indictment is “unprecedented.”
But it is not. Lots of prominent people are indicted. Prosecutors go after company chief executives, members of Congress, lawyers, and yes professors. The list of indicted Federal officials is long. Unless you believe a president or former president should be above the law, you should not be objecting on grounds of “precedent” to indictment of a former president.
Indictment of presidents and prime ministers in other countries is common. Prime Minister Netanyahu is a prominent current example, but so too are former Kosovo President Thaci and former Serbian President Milosevic. The list of former heads of government later imprisoned is also long, but of course not all of them deserved what they got.
Only time will tell
We are going to have to wait a while–maybe even a year or two–to learn whether Trump’s indictment will lead to a plea bargain, acquittal, or conviction. In the meanwhile, the indictment will become a political football, with both Democrats and Republicans trying to score big before the November 2024 election. Most Americans believe an indictment should disqualify a candidate from running for president. But Republicans mostly back Trump and think the indictment is an unjustified political move.
Politics won’t wait for a court decision and the inevitable appeal if Trump is found guilty. In the meanwhile, many other investigations are ongoing. Some involve potentially far more serious violations than the current indictment, including election interference in Georgia and insurrection for the January 6 riot at The Capitol. Only time will tell how this all shakes out.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, March 31
– Both Russia and Ukraine make recruiting push.
– DOD pushes back at unfunded priority lists.
-Iraqi Kurdistan is crumbling, FP says.
– Two former officials assess Israel’s problems today.
– In FA, an interesting case for security guarantees to Ukraine.
– Also in FA, an argument taking seriously Xi’s preparations for war.
– WaPo has a list of nations still recognizing Taiwan.
– Foreign Service union opposes declassifying Afghan dissent memo.
– NYT says DeSantis foreign policy adviser was a hawk.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, March 30
– IGs report on Ukraine aid.
– RUSI reports on Ukraine lessons.
-WaPo reports on Bibi-Biden split; Axios has more.
– Axios reports on how Zients runs the WH. Note that SecTreas Yellen attends the staff meeting.
-USD Kahl explains why no F16s to Ukraine.
-Trump think tank prepares “battle plans” for Mexico
– Senate votes 66-30 to repeal Iraq AUMFs, but McCarthy may not take House vote.
– Feds work hard to recruit young employees.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, March 29
– WSJ says Russian economy is weakening-
– Harvard prof lists options for enlarging the House.
-Tom Friedman says Netanyahu can’t be trusted
-Navy prof summarizes the role of intelligence in the Iraq war.
–McConnell opposes Iraq AUMF repeal.
– WaPo tells about the SAIS student accused as a Russian spy.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, March 28
– Most national leaders aren’t very popular now.
– NYT reports on Biden pressure on Netanyahu before his delay in reform law.
– Lawfare analyzes the Herzog alternative.
– Biden sends war powers report on Syria attack. But says no more attacks for now.
– Belgian intelligence worried about Huawei.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
