UN body urges Israel to allow nuclear inspections
Sylvia Westall, Reuters, Sep 18 2009
Arab states in the IAEA’s annual member states gathering on Friday won narrow approval of a resolution urging Israel to put all its atomic sites under UN inspection and join the NPT. Israel deplored the measure for singling it out while many of its Islamic neighbors remained hostile to its existence, and said it would not cooperate with it. The non-binding resolution, which passed for the first time in 18 years of attempts thanks to more non-aligned nation votes, voiced concern about Israeli nuclear capabilities and urged the IAEA to tackle the issue. Israel is one of only three countries worldwide, along with India and Pakistan, outside the nuclear NPT. Iranian Ambassador Soltanieh told reporters Friday’s vote was a glorious moment and a triumph for the oppressed nation of Palestine. Tehran was one of the 21 countries sponsoring the measure. Iran absorbed a setback later, when its bid to make legally binding a 1991 resolution banning attacks on nuclear sites failed to win a consensus from the bloc of Non-Aligned Movement nations and so was not brought up for a vote (obviously, because India and Pakistan opposed it – RB). UNSC members Russia and China backed the Israel resolution, passed by a 49-45 margin. The vote split along Western versus non-Western lines. There were 16 abstentions. Chief Israeli delegate Danieli told the chamber:
Israel will not cooperate in any manner with this resolution, which is only aiming at reinforcing political hostilities and lines of division in the Middle East region.
Western states said it was unfair and counterproductive to isolate one member state. They said an IAEA resolution passed on Thursday, urging all Middle East nations to foreswear atomic bombs, included Israel and made Friday’s proposal unnecessary. Arab nations said Israel had brought the resolution on itself by having never signed the 40-year-old NPT. Before the vote, US Ambassador Davies said:
The resolution is redundant. Such an approach is highly politicized and does not address the complexities at play regarding crucial nuclear-related issues in the Middle East.
Calling the resolution unbalanced, Canada tried to block a vote on the floor with a no-action motion, but the procedural maneuver, which had prevailed in 2007 and 2008, lost by an eight-vote margin. A senior diplomat from the Non-Aligned Movement said times had changed:
People and countries are bolder now, willing to call a spade a spade. You cannot hide or ignore the truth, the double standards, of Israel’s nuclear capability forever. The new US administration has certainly helped this thinking with its commitment to universal nuclear disarmament and nuclear weapons-free zones.
Arab diplomats point to an imbalance of power in the Middle East caused by unchecked Israeli might and say it breeds instability and spurs others to seek mass-destruction weapons. The measure was last voted on in 1991, when it passed by 39-31 with 13 abstentions, when IAEA membership was much smaller. Since then there have only been official summaries of debate on this item or successful motions for adjournment or no action.
Niqnaq 
5 Comments
The vote split along replace “Western” by shabbas goy versus replace “non-Western” by freemen lines
I actually replaced ‘developing’ with ‘non-aligned’ and ‘non-Western’ respectively in the two places Ms Westall used it. I take exception to this patronising, occidentotic term. In any case, in the second instance, she was using it inaccurately, because the vote in favour included not only China but Russia, which cannot possibly be dismissed as a ‘developing nation’.
Few of the ‘non-aligned’ countries are actually non-aligned: they are generally Western dependencies. However, from time to time, they show signs of revolt, as on this occasion. Wikipedia has a tolerably accurate short history of the NAM, here.
thus spake hasbarians:
Israel will not cooperate in any manner with this resolution, which is only aiming at reinforcing political hostilities and lines of division in the Middle East region.
get it?
israel has 200+ nukes, by all accounts.
it has, with complete impunity, assaulted every islamic neighbor and beyond, on multiple occasions – this was made entirely possible by its mind boggling military superiority, reinforced by those nukes.
any movement that aims to diminish these astronomical advantages “reinforces political hostilities and lines of division in the Middle East“.
concisely (reading from “Geometry of Zion”, it just needs to be written):
huge differences in israel’s favor
equal
“political amicability and tolerance, i.e., no division, all are equal”,
and
even approximate balance of forces, discouraging unchecked israeli aggression
equals
political hostilities and lines of division.
polite applause from trained seals, merkel, obama, harper, brown, sarkozy, rudd, the sound of wet flippers sloshing.
Affirmative, lobro, I copy that, over and out. 😆
“Israel will not cooperate in any manner…blah blah blah…”
Yes, an what’s more, Mr. Imadinnerjacket is a holocaust denier. 🙂