Obama also spoke after the meeting only to call
's possible possession of nuclear weapons a profound danger for the entire world. “We can't afford a nuclear arms race in the Iran Middle East.”
The American president however failed to mention the sixth-largest nuclear power in the world,
which is the sole possessor of an atomic arsenal in the Israel Middle Eastand has at least 100 bunker-buster bombs.
Tel Aviv is not a signatory to the NPT and pursues a policy of 'strategic ambiguity', according to which it neither admits nor denies the dimensions of its nuclear activities.
Come to think of it, isn’t “strategic ambiguity” exactly the policy being pursued by
Others may wish to comment on whether or not the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty prohibits “strategic ambiguity.” Whatever one’s interpretation of the treaty, to castigate Iran for pursuing such a policy as a signer while encouraging Israel to pursue it as a non-signer only weakens the international non-proliferation regime. More to the point for the immediate issue of how
The Iranian report’s coupling of the nuclear issue with the highly controversial provision to
Once this concept is accepted, then it may become easier to negotiate reasonable compromises based on the question, “Are the truly dangerous offensive weapons of each side balanced so as to provide reasonable security to each side?” When this becomes the focus of negotiations, the door opens to a host of rational trade-offs.
_____________________The IAEA has just reported that there are no indications of covert diversion of Iran’s nuclear program toward militarization, but that because of the increased pace of Iran’s program, "improvements to the containment and surveillance measures are required in order for the agency to continue to fully meet its safeguards objectives.”