How Trump & 3 Other US Presidents Protected «Israel’s» Worst-Kept Secret: Its Nuclear Arsenal

20-06-2018 | 15:37

When a delegation of senior “Israeli” officials visited the Trump White House on February 13, 2017, they wanted to discuss several issues with their new American counterparts. Topping the list was a secret letter concerning a subject the “Israelis” had promised the Americans never to discuss publicly-“Israel’s” undeclared nuclear arsenal.

Dimona

In a recent piece for The New Yorker, I described a tense scene in the West Wing as the “Israeli” delegation-which included “Israel’s” Ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer-tried to get the letter signed by President Donald Trump. By all accounts, the American Administration was eager to please the “Israeli” Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, whom Trump had promised to lavish with unprecedented support. But, at that chaotic moment, Trump’s aides felt blindsided by the “Israeli” request. They knew nothing about the existence of any letters and were confused by the sense of urgency coming from the “Israelis”. The Americans had other pressing concerns-later that day, Michael Flynn, the national-security adviser, would hand in his resignation letter-and they didn’t appreciate feeling as though the “Israelis” were telling them what to do…

The White House’s reaction was understandable. There had been a similar moment of surprise eight years earlier, when Barack Obama became President and received a similar request. The very existence of the letters had been a closely held secret. Only a select group of senior American officials, in three previous Administrations, knew of the letters and how “Israeli” leaders interpreted them as effectively an American pledge not to press the “Jewish state” to give up its nuclear weapons so long as it continued to face existential threats in the region. (American officials say the letters weren’t that explicit and fell short of constituting a binding commitment.) When Trump’s aides moved into the White House, they didn’t find any copies of the previous letters left behind by their predecessors. The documents had been sent to the archives. The Israelis, however, had copies.

“Israel” crossed the nuclear threshold on the eve of the Six Day War, in 1967. At that time, it had three nuclear devices, according to Avner Cohen, a nuclear historian at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey and the author of two books on the origins of “Israel’s” nuclear program. “Israeli” efforts to build a bomb at the nuclear complex in Dimona had been a source of tension with Washington for nearly a decade. But, by the fall of 1969, when Golda Meir, “Israel’s” Prime Minister, met with Richard Nixon at the White House, “Israel’s” possession of nuclear weapons was a fait accompli and the two sides reached an unwritten understanding: the “Israelis” would not declare, test, or threaten to use their nuclear weapons; and the Americans would not pressure the “Israelis” to sign a landmark international nuclear-nonproliferation treaty known as the N.P.T. (“Israel” never became a signatory and US efforts to inspect Dimona stopped.)

Successive “Israeli: governments abided by the arrangement, which, in Hebrew, is referred to as “amimut,” which means opacity. In English, the arrangement is often referred to as “Israel’s” “policy of ambiguity.” A joint document describing the agreement was never prepared. Instead, each side relied on its own notes, a former official said. President Gerald Ford abided by Nixon’s deal. “Israeli” officials were concerned that Jimmy Carter would chart a different course, but the American position, through the Carter and Reagan Administrations, remained unchanged.

The “Israelis” first started to feel as though the unwritten Meir-Nixon arrangement was no longer sufficient during the Presidency of George H. W. Bush, when, after the first Gulf War, in 1991, world powers talked about the possibility of creating a zone in the Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms.

The first iteration of the secret letter was drafted during the Clinton Administration, as part of an agreement for “Israel’s” participation in the 1998 Wye River negotiations with the Palestinians. In the letter, according to former officials, President Bill Clinton assured the “Jewish state” that no future American arms-control initiative would “detract” from “Israel’s” “deterrent” capabilities, an oblique but clear reference to its nuclear arsenal. Later, “Israeli” officials inserted language to make clear to Washington that “Israel” would “defend itself, by itself,” and that it would, therefore, not consider the American nuclear arsenal to be a substitute for “Israeli” nuclear arms. George W. Bush, when he became President, followed Clinton’s lead, signing a similar letter, former officials told me.

Then, in 2009, a new President, Barack Obama, took office. From almost the start, Netanyahu was distrustful of Obama, and vice versa. “With Obama, we were all crazy,” an “Israeli” official told me. That April, Obama delivered an aspirational speech in Prague, setting out “America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Obama’s advisers subsequently learned “how paranoid Bibi was that Obama was going to try to take away ‘Israel’s’ nuclear weapons,” a former US official told me, adding, “Of course, that was never our intent.” Obama signed an updated version of the letter in May, 2009.

While “Israeli” officials interpreted the letters as an effective commitment by successive American Presidents not to pressure “Israel” regarding its nuclear arsenal, US officials told me that they viewed the letters as less categorical. “It was not a blanket ‘We’ll never ask “Israel” to give up its nuclear weapons.’ It was more, ‘We accepted the “Israeli” argument that they’re not going to disarm under current conditions in the Middle East,” a former US official told me. Avner Cohen, the Middlebury Institute historian, said that US Administrations have been reluctant to give up entirely on the possibility of ridding the region of nuclear weapons if “Israel” were to reach a comprehensive peace agreement with its neighbors, including Iran.

Ahead of a nonproliferation conference in 2010, Netanyahu became concerned, once again, that “Israel” could come under international pressure to disarm. In response, Obama made a public statement that echoed the contents of the secret letters, without revealing their existence. “We discussed issues that arose out of the nuclear-nonproliferation conference,” Obama said, after meeting with Netanyahu on July 6, 2010. “And I reiterated to the Prime Minister that there is no change in US policy when it comes to these issues. We strongly believe that, given its size, its history, the region that it’s in, and the threats that are levelled against . . . it, that ‘Israel’ has unique security requirements. It’s got to be able to respond to threats or any combination of threats in the region. And that’s why we remain unwavering in our commitment to ‘Israel’s’ security. And the United States will never ask ‘Israel’ to take any steps that would undermine their security interests.”

The tense scene in the West Wing over the letter came on the heels of a particularly chaotic transition, from Obama to Trump. Their advisers distrusted one another, and it is unclear if they ever discussed the “Israeli” letters before the Inauguration. So when Ambassador Dermer came to the White House to talk to Michael Flynn about arranging for Trump to sign the letter, Trump’s aides were confused and, initially, said that they needed more time. US officials said that the “Israelis” wanted to limit who could take part in discussions of the letter, citing the need for secrecy. The Americans pushed back. Afterward, senior White House officials huddled together and complained to each other that Dermer had acted as though he owned the White House. Dermer declined to comment on the letter and told me that he does not recall any cursing. Flynn was ousted that night. Later, Trump signed the letter, becoming the fourth US President to do so.

Like Obama’s advisers, Trump’s aides were baffled by the importance that Netanyahu placed on getting the letters signed so quickly. Cohen said that the issue is central for Netanyahu because the nuclear arsenal fuels his “sense of impunity, sense of ‘Israel’ being so powerful, that it can dictate its own terms in the region and beyond.”

Source: The New Yorker, Edited by website team

Advertisements

NORTH KOREA THREATENS TO CALL OFF PYONGYANG-WASHINGTON SUMMIT, SLAMS U.S APPROACH

16.05.2018

South front

North Korea Threatens To Call Off Pyongyang-Washington Summit, Slams U.S Approach

North Korea would reconsider its participation in the historical Pyongyang-Washington summit in Singapore planned for June 12, the country’s state-run news agency KCNA reported on May 16.

According to a press statement of North Korean First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Kye-gwan, North Korea’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un stated that its country isn’t interested in any negotiations that envisage only unilateral denuclearization without guarantees.

Kim Jong Un criticized the “so-called Libya mode of nuclear abandonment” as this move hadn’t been an “expression of intention to address the issue through dialogue.”

“It is essentially a manifestation of awfully sinister move to impose on our dignified state the destiny of Libya or Iraq which had been collapsed due to yielding the whole of their countries to big powers,” the statement reads.

“It is absolutely absurd to dare compare the DPRK, a nuclear weapon state, to Libya which had been at the initial stage of nuclear development.”

Kim Jong Un called on US President Donald Trump to review their policy towards North Korea:

“If the Trump administration takes an approach to the DPRK-U.S. summit with sincerity for improved DPRK-U.S. relations, it will receive a deserved response from us.”

On May 15, Pyongyang cancelled the May 16 North-South Korean talks “in light of the provocative military” military exercises between the South Korea and the US, KCNA reported.

The large-scale 2018 Max Thunder joint air combat drill throughout South Korea started on May 11 and will last until May 25.

According to the KCNA report, the military exercise “is a deliberate challenge to the Panmunjom declaration and is a deliberate military provocation” and “reflects the unchanging attitude of the US and South Korea to continue ‘maximum pressure and sanctions’ against us.”

On May 15, a spokeswoman for the US Department of State Heather Nauert defended the right to conduct drills and pointed out that Washington would continue planning the meeting with North Korea’s leader:

“We have not heard anything from that government or the Government of South Korea to indicate that we would not continue conducting these exercises or that we would not continue planning for our meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong-un next month.”

According to a press release of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of North Korea posted on May 15, North Korea’s government took “technical measures for dismantling the northern nuclear test ground of the DPRK in order to ensure transparency of discontinuance of the nuclear test”.

“A ceremony for dismantling the nuclear test ground is now scheduled between May 23 and 25, depending on weather condition,” the document reads.

On April 29, US National Security Advisor John Bolton stated that Washington “is looking at the Libya model of 2003, 2004” for North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons, according to the interview at the US TV channel CBS News.

In 2003, Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program under the “international community” pressure and transferred its nuclear weapons to the US. In 2011, the US and its NATO allies intervened Libya, backed an armed insurrection and immersed Libya into chaos.

Related Aricles

israel: The Real Middle East Nuclear Threat

Source

There is in fact a Middle Eastern nation that is in fact in control of a vast, undeclared stockpile of nuclear weapons. This nation does have the capability of deploying those weapons anywhere in the region. It is not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and its arsenal has never been inspected by any international agency. But this nation is not Iran. It’s Israel.

Source: www.corbettreport.com

 

Netanyahu trying to divert attention from israel’s massacre of Palestinian children to Iran’s fictitious nuclear weapons program

Netanyahu: Don’t Look Here Where We’re Shooting Children, Look Over There at Iran

By Juan Cole,

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, a notorious warmonger, serial liar and supremacist racialist who used to lead the closest thing Israel has to a fascist party until parties even more extreme got elected to parliament, is attempting to bamboozle the clueless Trump into getting on a war footing with Iran.

Netanyahu’s breathless announcement that there was a potential weapons aspect to Iran’s nuclear enrichment program has been known for a decade and a half.

Netanyahu even seems to have provoked the White House to issue a communique falsely stating that Iran has a weapons program presently, which it promptly had to retract. The incident is so scary because it shows how easy it is to manipulate the erratic Trump and his not-ready-for-prime-time staff. That sort of thing, David Frum said on Twitter, can cause a war. And he should know.

But the retraction is incorrect, as well. Iran in the distant past had done some things that would be helpful if it had launched a full blown weapons program. It never did launch such a program.

Netanyahu instanced no evidence at all that Iran is out of compliance with the 2015 deal, and UN inspectors continually have affirmed that Tehran *is* in compliance. His allegation that Iran’s recent missiles are designed to be fitted with warheads is simply false.

So why try to put Iran on the front burner of American war-making? It is a desperate attempt on Netanyahu’s part to divert world attention from the ongoing Israeli Apartheid discrimination against the stateless Palestinians, which it militarily occupies (directly with jackboots and colonial settlers on the West Bank, indirectly with military encirclement and the sniping of innocent protesters in Gaza).

In recent weeks, Israeli snipers have used live ammunition to kill some 40 and wound hundreds of Palestinians who were unarmed and peacefully protesting their imprisonment in the Gaza Strip (70% of their families were kicked out of their homes in Israel and now live in squalid refugee camps while European Israelis took over their houses and farmland and are living it up). The sniping victims have including children, journalists, demonstrators distant from the Israeli confinement fence, and worshipers at prayer with the mention of God on their lips. Shooting unarmed people who pose no threat is a war crime, and doing it systematically amounts to a crime against humanity. So too is the crime of Apartheid described in the Statute of Rome as a “crime against humanity,” and Israel manifestly and robustly practices Apartheid against the Palestinians under its military heel.

The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program (to make fuel for reactors generating electricity) was designed to prevent Iran from weaponizing the program.

All nuclear enrichment via centrifuges is potentially dual use. Uranium can be enriched to 5% for reactor fuel, but if scientists keep feeding it through the centrifuges they can enrich it to 95% for a bomb. The Iran deal was designed to keep Iran from making high enriched uranium (HEU).

Iran accepted spot inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. No country under active inspections has ever developed a nuclear weapon.

Iran vastly reduced the number of centrifuges it has, which means it would take at least a year or even years to make HEU, even if it could do so without the inspectors detecting the signature at the site, which it cannot.

Iran discontinued and bricked in its planned heavy water reactor at Arak. Fissile material builds up on the rods in a heavy water reactor much faster than on a light water reactor, and so the heavy water ones can theoretically aid in making a bomb. Iran no longer even has a plan for a heavy water reactor.

Iran destroyed its stockpile of uranium enriched to 19.5% for its medical reactor. It has no enriched uranium higher than 5%, useful for its three reactors at Bushehr. Iran benefits from nuclear energy because it burns oil for electricity generation, cutting into the money it could make from instead selling it on the open market.

South Korea, Japan and France all use nuclear reactors for electricity generation just as Iran is starting to. France enriches uranium both for that purpose and to make nuclear weapons. If you don’t think Japan could construct a bomb in three weeks if it wanted to, you don’t know Japanese technology (they have a big stockpile of plutonium).

So Netanyahu and the American Right should have sighed in relief, right? Remember, Netanyahu has several hundred actual real nuclear bombs that it could drop on Iran, and Iran has bupkes. Likewise the US is bristling with nuclear warheads. Iran has some old F4 jets Nixon gave them.

In 2007, the National Intelligence Estimate of the CIA assessed that Iran did some experiments with military significance in 2003 but then halted them ever after. The 2011 NIE repeated the conclusion that Iran did not have a weapons program at that time and had not decided to pursue one.

Our sloppy and sometimes propagandistic press keeps talking about Iran’s “nuclear weapons program,” but it is a unicorn. No such thing has ever existed per se, though the experiments and programs Iran pursued as part of its civilian energy program always had potential weapons implications, and Iranian scientists did perform some occasional experiments that might have had weapons purposes.

Because nuclear enrichment is dual use, Iran until 2015 always had the option of going for broke and pursuing a bomb, using know-how gained from the civilian program. That is all the CIA was saying. It was also saying that no such decision had been taken, a conclusion echoed by Israeli politicians like Ehud Barak and by Israeli intelligence.

But the JCPOA forestalled any such decision. Iran could only make a bomb now by kicking out the inspectors and manufacturing thousands of centrifuges, in other words by putting up a huge neon sign saying “I am making a nuclear bomb here.”

Iran’s nuclear enrichment program has also always probably been intended to have deterrent effects against anyone thinking of doing to the country what Bush did to Iraq. I.e. if it was clear someone was planning to invade, Iran could in fact go for broke and try to defend itself.

Since the US right wing and the government of Israel would very much like to see Iran invaded and its government overthrown, and its legs broken, this nuclear latency or the Japan option is an annoyance they would like to remove. It is easier to execute someone if you disarm him first.

But Iran of course is already substantially disarmed, voluntarily. What is going on now is an attempt to pull the wool over people’s eyes about that and to con them into spending $6 trillion on another ruinous Middle East conflict.

That will keep everybody busy while Netanyahu finally succeeds in ethnically cleansing what is left of the Palestinians, his ulterior ultimate goal.

*

Juan Cole is the founder and chief editor of Informed Comment and Richard P. Mitchell Professor of History at the University of Michigan.

Bibi Baby

May 01, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

 Like a raging toddler pointing to another toddler’s nappies while his own pampers dripped from every direction. 

Like a raging toddler pointing to another toddler’s nappies while his own pampers dripped from every direction.

By Gilad Atzmon

Yesterday PM Netanyahu provided a fascinating glimpse into a psychotic tribal mind. A clown who sits on a huge pile of WMDs, an arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons designed to kill millions, is crying foul, complaining that another state in the region may attempt to equip itself with similar weapons as a means of deterrence. Netanyahu’s performance looked like a raging toddler pointing to another toddler’s nappies while his own pampers are dripping from every direction.

Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East. Israel has never allowed any international body into its nuclear and other WMD facilities.

The international community was unimpressed by Bibi’s absurd theatrics.  A senior European diplomat told Reuters:

“We knew all of this and what especially stands out is that Netanyahu doesn’t speak of any recorded violations of the 2015 Iran deal.”

It does not take a genius to gather that if Iran stored its 1999-2003 nuclear research archive in an unprotected warehouse, it didn’t regard the information as a strategic or sensitive asset.

Why are Netanyahu and the Israelis horrified by the Iranian nuclear project? Most likely, Projection. Israel operates as the regional bully. Its relationship with its neighbours is defined by crude violence and abuse. It is only human and natural for abusers to assume that their victims are as violently inclined as they themselves are. The Israelis tend to attribute their own violent traits to the Palestinians, to the Iranians and to Muslims in general. This psychological tendency is called projection. It is a vicious cycle, the more abusive you are, the more haunted you are by the notion that your victims may be as malevolent as you have been.

Jesus Christ identified this psychological trait in his fellow Hebrews and counselled them on how to counter this barbarian tendency. Instead of believing their neighbors evil, he told them to  Love their neighbor and turn the other cheek. It didn’t take long before Jesus was nailed to the cross. But his message has remained with much of humanity. I would like to believe that when the Bibis of the world find their path towards compassion the Jewish State will be redeemed and matured. I don’t hold my breath for that to happen anytime soon.

If they want to burn it, you want to read it!

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto,

 

SYRIA & IRAN PROVE THERE’S NO CHANCE FOR NORTH KOREAN PEACE

South Front

03.05.2018

Syria & Iran Prove There's No Chance For North Korean Peace

(Korea Summit Press Pool via AP)

Written by Brandon Smith; Originally appeared on alt-market.com

There is a saying in geopolitics that peace summits are generally a perfect time to prepare for war. This thinking stems from the military philosophy of Sun Tzu, who believed that when a nation is weak it is important to appear strong, and when a nation is at its most dangerous it is important to appear weak or “diplomatic.” Sun Tzu also often praised the virtues of distraction and sleight of hand, not only in war, but in politics as well.

I would note that Sun Tzu and the Eastern “sleight of hand” methodology is not only a mainstay of Chinese as well as North Korean thought, but also required reading for Western covert intelligence agencies. It is important to fully understand this methodology when examining the East vs. West paradigm, because almost everything you see and hear when it comes to relations with countries like China and North Korea is theater. Their governments have hidden schemes, our governments have hidden schemes and the globalists manipulating both sides have plans that trump everything else.

Keep all of this in mind when you hear about the sudden and almost inexplicable announcements of peace summits with North Korea in May or June between Pyongyang and the Trump administration.

Looking at the scenario purely from the perspective of political motive, it’s difficult to discern why Trump has been so obsessed with North Korea since he first entered office. North Korea has always had nuclear capability as well as the ability to deploy those nukes in one form or another against the U.S. North Korea has also always been involved in further nuclear testing and missile testing. The idea that such testing today is somehow a “violation” of arbitrary international standards and etiquette is absurd. Almost every nation in the world is engaged in military expansion and development.

Then again, if one only looks at surface rhetoric and policy, it is difficult to discern why the Trump White House is equally obsessed with Syria and the Assad regime. One of the primary driving forces behind the Trump election campaign was the idea that this was a candidate that would break from establishment elites in the tradition of perpetual war. Trump’s criticisms of past presidents and their handling of Iraq and the Middle East was supposed to represent a sea change in American policies of aggression. Instead, his cabinet is now laced with the cancers of neo-conservative warhawks (fake conservatives) and globalist banking proponents.

The U.S. was supposedly mere months away from completely removing its military presence from Syria. Yet a well timed “chemical attack” on a Damascus suburb, blamed on Assad, gave Trump a perfect rationale for keeping troops in the region as well as escalating the use of force through missile bombardment. The original claim under President Obama was that we were in Syria because of the growing threat of ISIS (a terrorist movement supported by western covert intelligence). Now, the new enemy is the target globalists always intended — the Syrian government itself.

When I see news of North Korea abruptly embracing peace talks just after meetings with China and not long after wild threats were tossed around of impending nuclear conflict, I wonder about the true nature behind the abnormal shift in rhetoric. When I see Trump suddenly speaking of Kim Jong-un as “very honorable” after months of trading character attacks on social media, I have to wonder when the next false flag event similar to the Damascus farce will take place?

There are already clear signs that all is not as it seems when it comes to a potential North Korean peace agreement.

North Korea’s offer to halt nuclear testing in exchange for a truce with the U.S. rings a bit hollow when one realizes Pyongyang’s primary nuclear testing site has recently collapsed in on itself from overuse. Any halt on testing by North Korea is likely temporary as secondary sites are prepared.

It also should come as no surprise that North Korea is willing to enter into diplomatic talks only months after achieving successful tests on their first ICBMs capable of reaching the eastern seaboard of the US. Again, as Sun Tzu taught, when you are most dangerous it is important to appear weak to your enemies.

Trump’s newest National Security Adviser and neo-con warmonger, John Bolton, expressed “doubts” in interviews that North Korea will “give up” its nuclear armaments. Bolton and other globalists know full well that North Korea has no intention of disarming, and if this is going to be a prerequisite to any peace agreement then I would expect talks to fall apart before they ever begin.

During initial talks to engineer “peace” in Syria under the Obama administration, the establishment argument was that Assad would have to step down as president of Syria in order for diplomacy to move forward. Of course, as noted above, western covert agencies created ISIS out of thin air just as they created the Syrian civil war out of thin air. They caused an extreme civilian genocide through their ISIS proxies, blamed the Assad regime for the instability in the region and then, when their color revolution failed to unseat Assad, they ask him to relinquish power as a good will offering towards the peace process. See how that works?

Obviously, globalists knew Assad was never going to step down. Why would he when he knows that this was the goal behind the creation of ISIS from the very beginning? And so, Syria remains a useful point of chaos in the globalist arsenal as a larger war is an ever present possibility. It is a perpetual powder keg that could be set off anytime the globalists choose.

Iran is also an excellent example of the fraudulent nature of establishment peace agreements.  The initial agreement arrived at in 2015, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA), listed a drastic reduction in Iran’s Uranium stockpile and enrichment facilities.  Iran seems to have complied with this request according to initial reports, and has complied with IAEA requests for inspections.  However, globalist peace deals are never fixed – they can be changed at a moment’s notice to facilitate a breakdown in the agreement.

The US has recently made demands for the IAEA to inspect not only Iran’s nuclear facilities but also its military sites, which were not under the original IAEA purview.  Iran, of course, is not too happy about the idea of having its military bases subject to foreign inspections.  US officials have also claimed Iran is not following the “spirit of the agreement”; not because of any supposed nuclear development, but because of Iran’s support for the Assad regime in Syria.

On top of this, the US is seeking to change the original JCPOA while refusing to label the changes a “renegotiation”.  Officials have called for a “supplementary deal”, which to my mind is in fact a renegotiation of the original deal.  This is clearly meant to cause a collapse in the JCPOA, as Iran is unlikely to ever accept a renegotiation.

Finally, Israel is now claiming that Iran has broken the JCPOA by secretly developing nuclear technology.  Once again, like WMDs in Iraq and chemical weapons attacks in Syria, no hard evidence whatsoever has been produced to support this claim.  But, that might not matter at all as Israel has already initiated strikes against Iranian targets in Syria (Syria and Iran have a mutual defense pact), and they may very well attack Iran directly within the next year.

Globalists do not care about peace, they only care about timing their wars properly.  The same reality applies to North Korea. Here is how this situation is probably going to play out…

The Trump administration will enter into peace talks with outlandish demands of complete nuclear disarmament. North Korea has so far offered a freeze on testing, but again, this is probably due to the collapse of their main testing site. A freeze on testing is not the same as total disarmament.

North Korea will of course refuse disarmament. The establishment will push harder, causing North Korea to pull back from the talks, to reschedule talks multiple time or to abandon talks altogether. Then, the establishment will say North Korea is not serious about peace, therefore, the force of action may be justified. They will say they gave North Korea a chance to do things the easy way, but now the hard way is necessary.

North Korea missile tests will continue, and new nuke facilities will open. Trump will call for the kinetic termination of such sites.

People who actually believe that globalists will abandon one of its best geopolitical Pandora’s boxes in North Korea have still not learned their lesson from the Syrian debacle, or from Iran. These regions represent a gold mine of potential international chaos which can be used as cover for all sorts of misdeeds as well as continued economic decline.

As I have noted in past articles, it is rather convenient for the banking elites at the Federal Reserve that every time they make an announcement of further cuts to their balance sheet as well as continued interest rate hikes a new geopolitical crisis involving Donald Trump simultaneously erupts. Is this mere coincidence, or should we view it as a discernible trend?

If it is a trend, then I would expect further crisis events involving Syria. Iran and North Korea in May and June as the Fed is set to increase the size of its balance sheet reductions thereby pulling the plug on its long time policy of artificially supporting markets. More strikes in Syria as well as destabilizing relations with Iran are likely. A collapse in talks with North Korea should be expected, followed by more plunges in stocks and other assets.

israel ‘only state in Middle East that actually has nukes’: Analysts denounce Bibi’s Iran WMD claim

Source

RT | May 1, 2018
Israel 'only state in Middle East that actually has nukes’: Analysts denounce Bibi’s Iran WMD claim

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu is the wrong person to accuse Iran of seeking nuclear weapons as his country has repeatedly refused to join any non-proliferation treaties which equates it to North Korea, Middle East experts told RT.

Israel and its PM “are in no position to accuse Iran of anything, they’re not part of the nuclear deal, they’re not even a member [of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty],” said Hamed Mousavi, Professor of Political Science at the University of Tehran.

The analyst then commented on Netanyahu’s well-rehearsed Monday show, in which he claimed Israel has incriminating evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program in violation of the milestone 2015 deal. He noted the only entity in the world authorized to declare Iranian compliance or non-compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal is the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Mousavi went further, saying Netanyahu was “a serial liar,” also citing a 2011 microphone leak incident, in which former French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly spoke lowly of the Israeli premier.

“I can’t stand him,” he told Barack Obama, in what was believed to be a confidential discussion. The Frenchman also accused Netanyahu of constantly lying. Obama’s reply was:

“You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!”

“And we also have to remember the timing, I mean, this is coming less than two weeks before Trump makes a decision regarding if the United States wants to stay in the deal,” the expert said, noting that “Israel is the only regime in the region that actually has nuclear weapons.”

Israel is believed to possess nuclear weapons, though its officials have never officially denied nor admitted to having weapons of mass destruction. On the latest occasion, nuclear weapon proliferation experts Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen claimed in the renowned Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists back in 2013 that the Jewish state stopped producing nuclear warheads back in 2004 once it reached around 80 projectiles.

However, the country can easily double its arsenal since it has enough fissile material to build at least another 115 munitions, experts say.

In Mousavi’s view, if Donald Trump decides to come out of the nuclear accord, it would kill the deal. Iran could not afford complying with it because of US threats to sanction any company – not only American ones – that do business with the Islamic Republic. “And I think this is what Israel wants,” he concluded.

Dr. Maged Botros, Head of Political Science department at Helwan University in Egypt, emphasized that Netanyahu “repeatedly refused to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty,” which puts it “in the same position as North Korea.”

Netanyahu’s presentation has been “a setup for [US President Donald] Trump,” Botros said, suggesting the Israeli allegations could be a solution for the US President to throw away the 2015 deal.

The Egyptian expert recalled former US State Secretary Colin Powell, who claimed back in 2003 that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. “It proved to be false, now the history repeats itself,” he said.

North Korea accused Israel of having a nuclear arsenal last year, calling it a threat to peace in the Middle East. “Israel is the only illegal possessor of nukes in the Middle East under the patronage of the US. However, Israel vociferated about the nuclear deterrence of the DPRK, slandering it, whenever an opportunity presented itself,” the Foreign Ministry said at the time.

 

%d bloggers like this: