Israel's Nuclear Program
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Case #2 United States of America (Respondent)
Model International Court of Justice (MICJ) Case #2 United States of America (Respondent) Relocation of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem (Palestine v. United States of America) Arkansas Model United Nations (AMUN) November 20-21, 2020 Teeter 1 Historical Context For years, there has been a consistent struggle between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine led by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In 2018, United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the U.S. embassy located in Tel Aviv would be moving to the city of Jerusalem.1 Palestine, angered by the embassy moving, filed a case with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2018.2 The history of this case, U.S. relations with Israel and Palestine, current events, and why the ICJ should side with the United States will be covered in this research paper. Israel and Palestine have an interesting relationship between war and competition. In 1948, Israel captured the west side of Jerusalem, and the Palestinians captured the east side during the Arab-Israeli War. Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948. In 1949, the Lausanne Conference took place, and the UN came to the decision for “corpus separatum” which split Jerusalem into a Jewish zone and an Arab zone.3 At this time, the State of Israel decided that Jerusalem was its “eternal capital.”4 “Corpus separatum,” is a Latin term meaning “a city or region which is given a special legal and political status different from its environment, but which falls short of being sovereign, or an independent city-state.”5 1 Office of the President, 82 Recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital of the State of Israel and Relocating the United States Embassy to Israel to Jerusalem § (2017). -
CPC Outreach Journal #740
USAF COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER CPC OUTREACH JOURNAL Maxwell AFB, Alabama Issue No. 740, 02 September 2009 Articles & Other Documents: U.S. Eyes 12 Giant "Bunker Buster" Bombs Pakistan Denies It Altered US-made Missiles U.S. Mulls Alternatives For Missile Shield NSA: India Doesn‘t Need Another Nuclear Test Iran is Continuing Nuclear Activity, says United Nations Pakistani Nuke Scientist says Restrictions Lifted Watchdog Iran Ducking Scrutiny of Alleged Nuclear-Weapon 'Pak Enhancing Its Nuclear Weapons Capabilities' Studies, IAEA Says Nuclear Agency Says Iran Has Bolstered Ability to Ministry Wants ¥176 Billion for Missile Shield Make Fuel but Slowed Its Output Iran, Syria have not Carried Out Sufficient Cooperation Would-Be Killer Linked to Al Qaeda, Saudis Say in Clarifying Nuke Issues: IAEA Cargo of North Korea Materiel is Seized En Route to Israel Has Iran in Its Sights Iran Watchdog Extends Probe into Alleged Secret Site Don't Get Scammed By Russia Again 'IAEA Hiding Incriminating Evidence' Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Western Hypocrisy Iran 'Ready' for Nuclear Talks Another Attempt to Malign Pak Nuke Program Russia: Building a Nuclear Deterrent for the Sake of Controversy Over Pokhran-II Needless: Manmohan Peace (60th Anniversary of the First Soviet Atomic Test) U.S. Says Pakistan Made Changes to Missiles Sold for Defense Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information. This information includes articles, papers and other documents addressing issues pertinent to US military response options for dealing with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats and countermeasures. -
Air Strike at Osirak
Air Strike at Osirak Rumors have been circulating for years that Israel was getting ready to n the fall of 1980, Israeli military launch a pre-emptive attack on Iran’s emerging nuclear weapons capability. intelligence reported that the Osirak The speculation intensified as Iran prepared to move its uranium enrichment nuclear reactor, 12 miles southeast plant into a hardened mountain bunker. Iran continued to resist diplomatic of Baghdad, would become opera- and economic pressures to cease its quest for an atomic bomb. tional between July and November In February, Israel warned that the window of opportunity for a successful Iof 1981. Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein military operation was closing, and an attack could not be delayed much had no need for a reactor for electric longer if it was to be done at all. News reports said the Pentagon believed power production or other peaceful Israel might attack as early as April. purposes; Iraqi oil reserves were ranked There were inevitable comparisons to a situation with marked similarities sixth in the world. 30 years ago, when the Israeli Air Force wiped out a nuclear reactor in Iraq What Saddam really wanted from the just before it was to be activated. This is the story of the air strike at Osirak. reactor was the spent atomic fuel, from which plutonium could be extracted to manufacture the core of an implosion- 58 AIR FORCE Magazine / April 2012 relations with the Arab world. In the Iraq’s nuclear reactor was about to go hot. wake of severe gasoline shortages in If the Israelis were going to take action, the United States and Western Europe following the Arab oil embargo of it had to be soon. -
25 Years of the Sakharov Prize
CARDOC JOURNALS No 11 - NOVEMBER 2013 25 YEARS OF THE SAKHAROV PRIZE The European Parliament upholding freedom of thought ARCHIVE AND DOCUMENTATION CENTRE (CARDOC) EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EN Author of the document: Päivi VAINIOMÄKI Coordinator: Donato ANTONA EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ARCHIVE AND DOCUMENTATION CENTRE (CARDOC) [email protected] NB: The opinions expressed in this document are those of the author and in no way represent those of the European Parliament or of any of its bodies or services. Cover picture: Sculpture of Andrei Sakharov by Peter Shapiro © Barbara Krawcowicz, http://www.flickr.com/photos/krawcowicz/3953805297/ Other photos © European Union 1989-2012 - European Parliament. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. ISBN 978-92-823-4880-2 doi: 10.2861/38589 © European Union, 2013 Printed in Luxembourg TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 by Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 CHAPTER I – THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND ANDREI SAKHAROV _______ 9 CHAPTER II – THE CREATION OF THE SAKHAROV PRIZE _________________________________ 15 1. The proposal by Mr Deniau and the parliamentary report (1984-1985) ________ 15 2. The creation of the prize (1986-1988) ___________________________________________________________________ 19 2.1. Development -
Israel-Iran Short-Term Potential for Conflict
Executive Summary Monday, August 27, 2012 SPECIAL ANALYSIS: Israel-Iran Short-Term Potential for Conflict EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Despite comments by some Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that the window for attacking Iran’s nuclear program is closing, it is unlikely that Israel will conduct a unilateral attack in the short-term. Any attack would strain Israeli military capabilities to the limit, invite costly counterstrikes from Iran and/or its proxies, worsen global economic conditions (impair oil transshipments, Middle East instability, etc.), and severely damage the Israeli economy which, to-date, has been a success story for Prime Minister Netanyahu. Political Considerations Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments indicating that Israel will take unilateral action and not rely on allies is assessed as an effort to force President Obama’s hand in supporting future Israeli action or, optimally, pressuring the U.S. to take the lead in military action against Iranian nuclear facilities o Based on the perception that President Obama is vulnerable during the pre-election period on support-to-Israel issues with some voters Much of the Israeli government (including President Shimon Peres), leaders of the Israeli Defense Forces, and the Israeli public are not in support of an attack (61% oppose without U.S. support)i U.S. support, or acquiescence, does not seem to be in place as evidenced by recent trips to Israel by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, both of whom urged restraint -
The Nobel Peace Prize – Short List for 2013
Fredrik S. Heffermehl, Oslo, Lawyer and author, Latest title: The Nobel Peace Prize. What Nobel Really Wanted (Praeger, 2010) (published in Chinese, Finnish, Swedish (with Spanish, Russian coming). Phone: +47 917 44 783, email: [email protected], website http://www.nobelwill.org The Nobel peace prize – short list for 2013 (Who are QUALIFIED under the purpose of Nobel, as specified in his 1895 will?) In 2012 the Swedish authorities ordered the Nobel Foundation to respect the purpose described by Alfred Nobel in his will, i.e. to support those working to replace global militarism with global co-operation to realize a global peace system based on global law and disarmament. (For details, see: http://www.nobelwill.org). While Nobel had a plan for global peace and specified the kind of peace work he intended to support, the Norwegian awarders hand the their “Nobels” out in all directions without any idea or vision of how peace must be achieved. Few of the nominees for 2013 are qualified if the awarders would promote the peace vision of Nobel, instead of their own ideas. As documented by Fredrik S. Heffermehl in “The Nobel Peace Prize. What Nobel Really Wanted (Praeger, 2010), Nobel did not use the word “peace prize,“ he dedicated his prize to “the champions of peace,” further specified as “… the one who shall have done the most or the best work to realize the brotherhood of nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies as well as the organization and promotion of peace congresses” (quotes from 1895 will). Nominees qualified for the 2013 Nobel peace prize dedicated his prize to “the champions of peace,” those working for global demilitarization. -
Israel, Iraq, and Operation Opera
Chapter 8 Preventive Strikes: When States Call the Wrong “Bluff” On June 7, 1981, fourteen of Israel’s best fighter pilots gathered at Etzion air base, near Israel’s southernmost point. At 3:55 pm local time, the pilots entered their F-15 and F-16 fighter jets and took off. Their target: Osirak, a nuclear facility on the outskirts of Baghdad. Less than an hour later, the fighters had destroyed the facility. Israel had successfully executed one of the cleanest acts of preventive war in history. This book’s core theoretical model shows how a credible threat of preven- tive war heavily shifts bargaining power to the declining state. But thus far, the declining state has used that leverage to achieve better peaceful outcomes; the threat alone deterred the rising state. But Israel’s 1981 attack, dubbed Operation Opera demonstrates that rising states do not always successfully internalize a declining state’s preventive intentions. Why not? Operation Opera was neither the first nor last preventive assault.1 Nor- way’s Vemork Hydroelectric Plant was one of the earliest facilities capable of producing heavy water. On the eve of Nazi Germany’s invasion of Norway, French special forces smuggled the plant’s entire supply out of the country. When Nazi officials ordered the Vemork plant to produce more heavy water, Allied forces and Norwegian resistance sabotaged the its machinery, dealing a significant blow to Germany’s nascent nuclear program. Similarly, during the early stages of the Iran-Iraq War, Iran executed Operation Scorch Sword. With French assistance, Iraq broke ground the 1See Fuhrmann and Kreps 2010 for an exhaustive list of attacks on nuclear facilities. -
Cold War and Proliferation
Cold War and Proliferation After Trinity, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki and the defeat of Germany, the US believed to be in the absolute lead in nuclear weapon technology, US even supported Baruch plan for a short period of six months. But proliferation had started even before the Trinity test and developed rapidly to a whole set of Nuclear Powers over the following decades Spies and Proliferation At Potsdam conference 1945 Stalin was informed about US bomb project. Efficient Russian spy system in US had been established based on US communist cells and emigrant sympathies and worries about single dominant political and military power. Klaus Fuchs, German born British physicist, part of the British Collaboration at the Manhattan project passed information about Manhattan project and bomb development and design Plans to Russia. Arrested in 1949 in Britain and convicted to 14 years of prison. He served 9 years - returned to East Germany as Director of the Rossendorf Nuclear Research center. Fuchs case cause panic and enhanced security in US in times of cold war, fired by McCarthy propaganda. Numerous subsequent arrests and trials culminating in Rosenberg case! The second race for the bomb Start of soviet weapons program Program was ordered by Stalin in 1943 after being informed about US efforts. The administrative head of the program was Lavrenti Beria. Scientific director was Igor Kurchatov, Who headed the Russian nuclear research program and built the first Russian cyclotron in 1934. Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria (1899-1953), Soviet politician and police chief, is remembered chiefly as the executor of Stalin’s Great Purge of the 1930s His period of greatest power was during and after WW-II. -
Why Israel Is Still Afraid of Mordechai Vanunu | the Electronic Intifada 10/26/15, 10:47 AM
Why Israel is still afraid of Mordechai Vanunu | The Electronic Intifada 10/26/15, 10:47 AM THE ELECTRONIC INTIFADA Why Israel is still afraid of Mordechai Vanunu Jonathan Cook (/people/jonathan-cook) The Electronic Intifada (/people/electronic-intifada) 28 June 2004 Mordechai Vanunu reads a newspaper in the grounds of the Anglican cathedral of St George’s, East Jerusalem. (Meir Vanunu) He was the last breakfast companion I was expecting. Separated from me by a rack of toast and a handful of marmalade sachets was Mordechai Vanunu, the man who 18 years ago revealed that Israel had amassed a secret stockpile of nuclear weapons. Breakfast at the St George’s pilgrim guest house in East Jerusalem is usually a sedate affair, but on this occasion both he and I were skating unintentionally but dangerously close to arrest by Israel’s security services. Vanunu, who found sanctuary in the grounds of the Anglican cathedral of St George’s when he was released from jail two months ago, is under a severe gagging order imposed by the Israeli government. He is banned from talking to https://electronicintifada.net/content/why-israel-still-afraid-mordechai-vanunu/5134 Page 1 of 4 Why Israel is still afraid of Mordechai Vanunu | The Electronic Intifada 10/26/15, 10:47 AM all foreigners and most especially foreign journalists as the former Sunday Times reporter Peter Hounam discovered a few weeks ago when he was arrested by the Shin Bet secret services, held in a cell for 24 hours and then deported. Hounam’s crime was to arrange an interview for the BBC with Vanunu, trying to get round the restrictions by using an Israeli citizen to pose the questions. -
A Matter of National Security: Whistleblowing in the Military As a Mechanism for International Law Enforcement
FULLER (DO NOT DELETE) 1/26/2018 2:37 PM A Matter of National Security: Whistleblowing in the Military as a Mechanism for International Law Enforcement DR. ROSLYN FULLER* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. I NTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 250 II. THE IMPACT OF EXTERNAL WHISTLEBLOWING ON STATE COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW .......................................................... 253 A. Iraq and Afghan War Logs, Cablegate and “Collateral Murder”................................................................................................... 253 B. NSA and GCHQ Surveillance Leaks........................................................ 257 C. Internal Whistleblowing as an Adequate Alternative? A Comparison .......................................................................................... 261 1. Abu Ghraib and the Taguba Report......................................................... 263 2. Internal Whistleblowing as Applied to the Cases of Chelsea Manning, Katharine Gun, and Anat Kamm....................................................................................................... 266 3. Guja v. Moldova—Internal Whistleblowing “Clearly Impracticable”.......................................................................... 269 III. EXTERNAL WHISTLEBLOWING WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ........................................................................................ 270 A. The Tricky World of International Law .................................................. -
Estimating Plutonium Production at Israel's Dimona Reactor
Estimating Plutonium Production at Israel's Dimona Reactor Alexander Glasera and Marvin Millerb aDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 bScience, Technology and Global Security Working Group Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 Abstract Israel has used the Dimona reactor in the Negev Desert since the 1960s for unsafe- guarded plutonium production. Estimates of cumulative historic production have been very uncertain, however, because the power level of the reactor is unknown, and there is a lack of detail about the reactor design. This analysis presents new estimates of historic plutonium production in Israel based on neutronics calcula- tions for the Dimona reactor (\EL-102"), which is based on a modified version of the French EL-3. We estimate that cumulative production of plutonium to date is 800 ± 125 kg. The paper also includes a critical review of the 1986 testimony by the Dimona technician and whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, which provided much of the basis for public discussion of the reactor's power and operation. Background1 Israel launched its nuclear weapons program in the 1950s, building a plutonium- production reactor and associated reprocessing plant with French assistance at a secret nuclear center at Dimona in the Negev Desert. The site is home as well to other weapon-related activities, including the production of tritium and possibly also of en- riched uranium (Figure 1).2 The most detailed revelations about the technical operations at Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona were published in a front-page article in the London-based Sunday Times in October 1986. That article was based on information supplied by Mordechai Vanunu, who was employed as a technician at Dimona from November 1976 until October 1985. -
Dimona (Shhh! It's a Secret)
Published by Americans for The Link Middle East Understanding, Inc. Volume 46, Issue 3 Link Archives: www.ameu.org July-August, 2013 D i m o n a (Shhh! It’s a secret.) By John F. Mahoney The Link Page 2 AMEU Board of Directors Israel is today’ssixth, if not fifth, most powerful nuclear state, Jane Adas (Vice President) with 100-plus nuclear weapons, along with the ability to build Elizabeth D. Barlow atomic, neutron and hydrogen bombs. How did it happen? Edward Dillon Rod Driver John Goelet Back in the late 1950s, France built a nuclear reactor for the Is- David Grimland raelis at a site in the Negev desert called Dimona. Ostensibly in- Richard Hobson (Treasurer) tended for generating nuclear energy for domestic use, it was later Anne R. Joyce revealed that its cooling circuits were built two to three times lar- Hon. Robert V. Keeley ger than necessary for the supposed 26-megawatt reactor, proof Kendall Landis that, from the beginning, it was designed to be a plutonium ex- Robert L. Norberg (President) traction plant for nuclear weapon fuel. Francis Perrin, the high Hon. Edward L. Peck commissioner of the French Atomic Energy Agency from 1951 to Donald L. Snook 1970, later explained why France gave atomic secrets to the fledg- Rosmarie Sunderland ing Jewish state: “Wethought the Israeli bomb was aimed against James M. Wall the Americans, not to launch it against America but to say ‘if you don’twant to help us in a critical situation we will require you to AMEU National help us, otherwise we will use our nuclear bombs’.”1 Council Hugh D.