Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear

Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear

By Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor

Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE and Saudi Arabia seek atom technology


THE SPECTRE of a nuclear race in the Middle East was raised yesterday when six Arab states announced that they were embarking on programmes to master atomic technology.

The move, which follows the failure by the West to curb Iran’s controversial nuclear programme, could see a rapid spread of nuclear reactors in one of the world’s most unstable regions, stretching from the Gulf to the Levant and into North Africa.

The countries involved were named by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Tunisia and the UAE have also shown interest.

All want to build civilian nuclear energy programmes, as they are permitted to under international law. But the sudden rush to nuclear power has raised suspicions that the real intention is to acquire nuclear technology which could be used for the first Arab atomic bomb.

“Some Middle East states, including Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Saudi Arabia, have shown initial interest [in using] nuclear power primarily for desalination purposes,” Tomihiro Taniguch, the deputy director-general of the IAEA, told the business weekly Middle East Economic Digest. He said that they had held preliminary discussions with the governments and that the IAEA’s technical advisory programme would be offered to them to help with studies into creating power plants.

Mark Fitzpatrick, an expert on nuclear proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said that it was clear that the sudden drive for nuclear expertise was to provide the Arabs with a “security hedge”.

“If Iran was not on the path to a nuclear weapons capability you would probably not see this sudden rush [in the Arab world],” he said.

The announcement by the six nations is a stunning reversal of policy in the Arab world, which had until recently been pressing for a nuclear free Middle East, where only Israel has nuclear weapons.

Egypt and other North African states can argue with some justification that they need cheap, safe energy for their expanding economies and growing populations at a time of high oil prices.

The case will be much harder for Saudi Arabia, which sits on the world’s largest oil reserves. Earlier this year Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Foreign Minister, told The Times that his country opposed the spread of nuclear power and weapons in the Arab world.

Since then, however, the Iranians have accelerated their nuclear power and enrichment programmes.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2436948,00.html

 

Since only Israel is nuclear...
And has very sophisticated devices and delivery systems...
Israel would have to "allow" any given Muslim enemy state to complete a nuclear program.

And since a series of Muslim state leaders...
Have publically maintained a policy of pre-emptive genocide towards the "Zionist Entity"...
Israel would have to have sufficiently WEAK leadership...
To "allow" such a Suicidal Event to take place.

This is serious business.
It's not Moon Bats debating alternative energy.

This is not about "public opinion" or the "Arab Street"...
But cold, hard Nuclear Strategic Doctrine and analysis...
Which is a very well developed military field.

So it seems INCONCEIVABLE that Israel would "allow" a nuclear Muslim state in the Middle East.

People talk about pre-emptive conventional strikes on Iran, etc...
But, imo, Israel will not hesitate to use tactical nukes if necesary.

Even under the apparently "weak" Olmert...
Israel took out most of Lebanon's infrastructure over several soldiers.

The showdown with Iran will happen in the next 12-24 months...
It's an unstoppable collision course...
And it's ** no coincidence ** that 50% of the US Army and Navy is sitting on Iran's border...
And, no, Nancy Pelosi will not be making these decisions.

The die has been cast... place your bets...

 

Iran needs to be dealt with one way or the other... only then will the Gulf States get the message that we cannot accept the disaster of yet more volatile Islamic states with a nuclear capability...

 

So,in the event Iran is attacked, gold and oil will probably go up.But what about the stocks?If the market tanks, will gold and oil stocks go down also?

 

I did not read the main news article but would strongly advise and hope that world community goes at lenghts to STOP this race of Arabic nations towards the nuclear assets. Ever heard the phrase 'nip at the bud'.

 

HoundDog, very sobering post... and an outcome that I also find inevitable.

I have been reading up on Iraq's nuclear progress with uranium isotope separation using calutrons thru the 1990's, and as you said "This is very serious business."

Hopefully after the elections, we will have a more frank and open discussion on this entire mideast nuclear arms race. This is definitely not a good thing for future stability.

As for the markets, I think we can look to past history for at least the direction. If intervention is one sided, limited. If we get hit hard on our own soil while intervention is in progress, all bets are off IMHO...

 

And it's really not about Israel at all...
It's about reestablishing the "Caliphate"...
An Islamic Empire stretching from Africa to Southeast Asia...
And eventually annexing Europe.

These guys think in terms of centuries...
Something unrelatable to the Western mind seeking only immediate gratification.

What I find interesting...
As a Catholic who converted to Evangelical Christianity...
Is that Pope Benedict is too cowardly to directly address this threat to his church...
To the point of pathetically groveling before Islamic leaders...
A new low for Appeasement.

Only GWB... an Evangelical Christian...
** Almost alone **... has the Moral Courage to confront and fight...
This new form of Totalitarian Fascism that has co-opted the Islamic Faith...
And directly threatens American citizens.

9/11 was clearly ** not enough **...
Perhaps when a nuclear device goes off in Manhattan in a few short years...
And your portfolio goes poof... Americans will finally "get it".

 

Seems to me they would want to stand up to the brutal racist aggression of US and Isreal. They are the biggest threat to peace and freedom, all they do is make war and suffering. Constant invasions and wars all to force others into economic oppression.


How does a racist bible thumper who invades only oil-rich countries help us or show courage? Isn't a concidence that an
Oil company CEO can go into an oil rich country and take over the oil, and is made a VP? And are you to tell me that US soldiers reall ywant to care and "liberate" dark skinned people over seas? Get real they would like to waste as many as they can. Brutal racism, think nothing of dropping WMD and causing suffering to poor civillians (as long as they have dark skin its ok).

But Gee, I wonder why oh why they would hate us?

Bible thumping extremists are very sick and violent. Mossad and its false flag operations sure spins the news and serves to make us froth at the mouth for war. Say, why is billions given every year of taxpayers money to Israel?Another concidence?


Bin laden is the #1salesman and spokesman for the government, they NEED him as an Eternal Enemy to justify these agression invasion. Sick propaganda we are shown.


If saddam was a brutal dictator (who tried to sell oil in Euros) why did Bush sr leave hin in power for 10 years!! 10 years they left him in power because he served our need. Coincidence?

 

I think that it will happen sooner then later. We had to get the elections over with.

Bush knows that if the Democratics get the white house in 2008 that they will not have to guts to get the job done. He understands that it will be up to him. He will not leave office without regime change in Iran and Syria.

We have recently put 2 new carrier task groups in the area and another is on the way which will make a total of 4 my next week.


John

The nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Eisenhower, and its accompanying carrier strike group, passed through the Suez Canal on Monday, Oct. 30, and arrived in the Red Sea on Tuesday, Oct. 31.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that the USS Eisenhower is at sea off the Saudi Arabian coast, together with another aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise. The presence of the two US aircraft carriers, and their accompanying strike groups, in a body of water as small as the Red Sea is an extraordinary development.

So far there have been no indications that the USS Eisenhower arrived to replace the USS Enterprise.

US Intelligence director John Negroponte also is in the region. He was in Saudi Arabia over the weekend and in Cairo on Tuesday, and is due to arrive in Israel on Wednesday, Nov. 1.

With the arrival of the USS Eisenhower in the region, there are now three US aircraft carriers in the Persion Gulf and surrounding waters, including the USS Iwo Jima. Accompanying the USS Eisenhower are the guided-missile cruiser USS Anzio, the guided-missile destroyers USS Rampage and USS Mason and the nuclear-powered fast-attack submarine USS Newport.

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that a fourth US aircraft carrier, the USS Boxer, will arrive on the scene by the beginning of next week, together with its carrier strike group. The USS Boxer is currently taking part in joint US-Indian naval maneuvers, dubbed Malabar ’06, which include the landing of marines on beaches.

 

Not likely to attack iran, much of the US's oil comes from that area, the country needs that oil to survive no way they would risk cutting it off. Follow the money, it's all about the money and our kids die for it.