Nuclear Weapons Free Middle East

[Michael]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered an important speech to the UN yesterday where she shocked the planet by stating that the US officially supports a nuclear weapons free Middle East.

Yesterday, I saw a clip of the speech as the lead story on the CBC 6 o'clock tv news and again the lead story for the CBC National News.

My searches through Google this morning trying to find a link for this important news event turned up ZERO coverage of US based media.

The only links I can find are small blogs I've never heard of, or Haaretz.com (Israeli news media) which has crashed my computer twice already so I'm not going to link to Haaretz.com.

Indeed, I'm not sure what is the bigger story here - Hillary's speech or the fact that US media is collectively ignoring it. :ummm:

This is the biggest news on the Middle East I've seen in years.

[Michael]

Still searching US news sources for any report of this huge announcement.

US foreign policy establishment appears to be dead silent on the issue. Non-US links are plentiful. :shrug:

[Donkey]

Maybe they're really stupid and don't realize she means Israel too?

[dilettante]

From what I've seen, there are caveats about any nuclear dearming being voluntary and only after a peaceful resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian issue has been found. It doesn't look like this is anything more than a nice thought; I don't see it signaling a change in policy.

[Americano]

Here it is (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/03/un.ahmadinejad/index.html):

"Clinton Monday reiterated U.S. support for a weapons-free zone in the Middle East, but said "the conditions for such a zone do not exist" without progress in peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians. The United States is working with Arab states and members of the nonaligned movement on an Egyptian proposal for a nuclear-free Middle East zone."

Zone seems to be the defining word, obviously excluding Israel but including Iran. Stupid fuckers.

[Michael]

From what I've seen, there are caveats about any nuclear dearming being voluntary and only after a peaceful resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian issue has been found. It doesn't look like this is anything more than a nice thought; I don't see it signaling a change in policy.
Mere statement of the issue represents a significant shift in tone from Washington on a issue that is generally the 'giant pink elephant' that no one is permitted to discuss.

[Donkey]

If anything has been significant about Obama's foreign policy it has been a shift in tone. While it's not enough for me, it is an improvement (as long as it is honest effort in shift, and not a disingenuous smokescreen.)

[Michael]

Here it is (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/03/un.ahmadinejad/index.html):

"Clinton Monday reiterated U.S. support for a weapons-free zone in the Middle East, but said "the conditions for such a zone do not exist" without progress in peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians. The United States is working with Arab states and members of the nonaligned movement on an Egyptian proposal for a nuclear-free Middle East zone."

Zone seems to be the defining word, obviously excluding Israel but including Iran. Stupid fuckers.

That's buried in paragraph 16 in the news article that is 18 paragraphs long and headlines about Hillary and Iran trading barbs at the UN.

It is doubly interesting that it is CNN's words for the "weapons-free zone" not Hillary's. Hillary spoke specifically about a "nuclear-weapons-free-zone" in the Middle East. That's careful parsing from CNN to downplay the actual content of the speech.

Everyone knows that a "weapons-free-zone" in the Middle East is just plain hippy-peacenik dreaming and not realistic. That's apparently the meme that CNN is pushing here in a very subtle way.

Amazing isn't it?

[Michael]

I just checked the CNN frontpage. There is no mention of that news article at all. Nothing under "US", "World" or "Politics".

I presume you found the story with a search engine?

[Americano]

I just checked the CNN frontpage. There is no mention of that news article at all. Nothing under "US", "World" or "Politics".

I presume you found the story with a search engine?

Yes. I've been following the recent US policy announcement of being firmly committed in its alliance with Israel and Israel's subsequent freeze on West Bank real estate development. I'm thinking Israel is again playing games with a now economically crippled US and will use US inability to do more than talk about stopping Iranian nuclear weapons development as an excuse to perhaps accelerate territorial gains. As France, the US and UK walked out of Iran's position declaration 20 minute in, the bickering between Hillary and Ahmadinejad exchanging barbs sounds like diplomatic show biz.

[MeMyselfAndI]

Israel will never agree to destroy their arsenal. And without that - no Nuclear Weapons Free Middle East.

[Americano]

Israel will never agree to destroy their arsenal. And without that - no Nuclear Weapons Free Middle East.

Iran without nuclear weapons is the US and Israeli definition of a nuclear weapons free Middle East zone. The fundamentalist Sunni Sauds, as repressive as a kingdom can be, support that position to keep such weapons out of the hands of Shia nations who are basically energy production competitors in world markets.

[Michael]

I think it is a clever way to put pressure on Israel to admit it.

[Americano]

I think it is a clever way to put pressure on Israel to admit it.

For as long as Israel remains mainlined on the US financial and military aid teat and such policy supported by the US military industrial complex with lobbyists showering boxcar loads of money and federal contracts on congress and its other special interests, Israel will go along with the program.