inside the glass house

WMD and western hypocrisy: If Libya can, why not Israel?
NEW YORK - In the latest James Bond movie "Die Another Day", a villainous North Korean tries to upstage the suave British secret service agent who warns him of the dangers of trading in "conflict diamonds" banned by the United Nations. "I know all about the UN," he tells Bond, claiming he is a product of two of the world's most prestigious universities.

"I went to Harvard and Oxford," the North Korean declares proudly -- and then adds the zinger: "And I majored in Western hypocrisy." Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi's decision last week to voluntarily dismantle his programmes for the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction generated strong support from the Western world. But it also revealed the degree of Western double standards and hypocrisy.

Virtually every single statement coming out of Western capitals, including Washington, London, Berlin and Paris, commended Qaddafi for coming clean. And rightly so. But most of the statements and newspaper editorials in the US and Britain also targeted three other countries -- Iran, North Korea and Syria -- urging them to follow in the footsteps of Libya.

But none of these statements or editorials had the courage to include Israel among the "rogue nations" or demand that the Jewish state also follow the Libyan example.
Israel, after all, is the only country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. And it is also one of the world's worst violators of human rights.

In April, the Washington Post quoted US intelligence sources as saying that Israel may have as many as 300 nuclear weapons and missile warheads. A cartoon in the London Financial Times showed Qaddafi revealing all his nuclear, biological and chemical weapons neatly packed in a brief case -- with the Syrian, Iranian and North Korean leaders virtually looking over his shoulder.

But missing from that gang of four was Israel's Ariel Sharon whose country has been given a free ride in the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. No Western leader -- neither President George W. Bush nor Prime Minister Tony Blair -- came out publicly last week warning Israel to also declare its arsenal of nuclear weapons. The Western reaction to Qaddafi's declaration was an example of hypocrisy at its worst.

In an editorial titled "Lessons of Libya", the New York Times said that Qaddafi's declaration demonstrated the value of diplomacy and UN sanctions as a tool against weapons proliferation. But the editorial only singled out North Korea and Iran as "current proliferators" -- and nary a word on Israel.

So did the Financial Times whose editorial titled "Sticks and Carrots to Get Disarmament" treated Israel as a sacred cow while pointing an accusing finger at Iran and North Korea. When Bush enunciated his new military doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on countries developing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) last April, he specifically warned Iraq, Iran and North Korea to clean up their acts or face dire consequences.

The same month Syria circulated a draft resolution in the 15-member Security Council calling for the establishment of a "nuclear weapons free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East". There have been three previous initiatives -- one by Iran in 1974, a second by Egypt in 1985 and a third by Syria in 1989 -- all of which never got off the ground primarily because of strong US opposition.

The Syrian draft resolution also called on the region's countries to declare their support for a Middle East "free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction, and the veritable destruction of such weapons".

Joseph Cirincione, lead author of "Deadly Arsenals: Tracking Weapons of Mass Destruction", says it is almost certain that the existence and spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons will remain an urgent public concern and policy problem, despite the US occupation of Iraq.

The bottom line, he said, in an article in "Arms Control Today", is that "you cannot get rid of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programmes in Arab countries unless you also address the elimination of Israel's nuclear and chemical programmes."

Currently, the five declared nuclear powers are also the five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, namely the US, Britain, France, China and Russia.
The continued existence of about 30,000 nuclear weapons long after the end of the Cold War still poses a grave danger to humanity. And this is further worsened by the fact that 5,000 of these weapons are on alert status -- meaning they are capable of being fired on 30 minutes' notice.

But the Big Five at the UN practise a hypocrisy of their own because they want to hold onto their nuclear weapons while castigating others for trying to reach nuclear status.
And under these circumstances, a nuclear-free world has a long way to go before it becomes a reality.

Back to Columns