UN tells Israel to let in nuclear inspectors

[IshCong]

So to take another treaty as an alternative example, it'd be wrong to force a nation to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention or the Biological Weapons Convention?

Or the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Since I am free to sign it or not, I'm choosing to not sign it so I can genocide my people as I want, nobody would have right to say anything to me as I did not sign the agreement.

It's unlikely you'd be forced to sign it. However, random genocides do run the risk of interventions. Of course, as the UN has shown repeatedly, the UN doesn't always actually bother to intervene in genocides.

[IshCong]

I imagine it is much harder, politically speaking, to sanction a nation for not signing a treaty than it is to sanction a nation for signing a treaty and then walking all over it.

It's certainly harder to sanction it, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better behaviour than walking all over a signed treaty.

Politics is inherently limited by what is feasible and always will be. Not much can be done to alter that.
Whether or not it is 'better behavior' depends on how one defines 'better', which my meters suggest is probably going to be subjective in this case.

Granted, what Iran's doing is not good, but I can understand how it might be a teeny bit irritating to be forced to let in nuclear inspectors after 30-ish years of only North Korea (which isn't actually in the NPT anymore and therefore not actually obliged by treaty to not develop nukes IIRC) being severely rebuked for pursuing a similar program, while Israel, the RSA when it did its own thing, India and Pakistan got slaps on the wrist at best.

Ideally they'd all (Israel, Iran, India, Pakistan and North Korea) allow in inspectors, but that's probably not going to happen soon.

Not likely, no.

[IshCong]

Or the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Since I am free to sign it or not, I'm choosing to not sign it so I can genocide my people as I want, nobody would have right to say anything to me as I did not sign the agreement.

Actually the UNDOHR isn't applicable to nations, it is applicable to humans. If you don't want your human rights then that is fine, but to take somebody else's violates THEIR use of the UNDOHR, and thus is illegal in the eyes of the international community.

The Declaration in question is non-binding, though it may impact other, binding, treaties or conventions.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

It's certainly harder to sanction it, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better behaviour than walking all over a signed treaty.

Politics is inherently limited by what is feasible and always will be. Not much can be done to alter that.
Whether or not it is 'better behavior' depends on how one defines 'better', which my meters suggest is probably going to be subjective in this case.

"Better" depends to be subjective.

Granted, what Iran's doing is not good, but I can understand how it might be a teeny bit irritating to be forced to let in nuclear inspectors after 30-ish years of only North Korea (which isn't actually in the NPT anymore and therefore not actually obliged by treaty to not develop nukes IIRC) being severely rebuked for pursuing a similar program, while Israel, the RSA when it did its own thing, India and Pakistan got slaps on the wrist at best.

Ideally they'd all (Israel, Iran, India, Pakistan and North Korea) allow in inspectors, but that's probably not going to happen soon.

Not likely, no.

And that's a real shame.

[Zweite Alaje]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

Of course, anytime someone questions the Jews, they're automatically anti-Semites.

[Neo Art]

I have absolutely no problem what so ever with having Israel's nuclear capabilities inspected by the UN. I'd even go so far as to say the US should have similar inspections, except for the the fact that America's nuclear capabilities are fairly well known at this point. IE: a lot.

[Al-Faisal]

For an observation, the poll appears to have stayed at approximately the same balance of 73-27% from the beginning. I find it interesting.

[The Galactic Commonwealth]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/04/un-tells-israel-nuclear-inspectors

The UN general assembly has overwhelmingly approved a resolution calling on Israel to open its nuclear programme for inspection.
The resolution, approved by a vote of 174 to six with six abstentions, calls on Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) "without further delay" and open its nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Those voting against were Israel, the US, Canada, Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau.
Resolutions adopted by the 193-member general assembly are not legally binding but they do reflect world opinion and carry moral and political weight. And the resolution adds to pressure on Israel as it faces criticism over plans to increase settlement in the West Bank, a move seen as retaliation for the assembly recognising Palestinian statehood.

Israel refuses to confirm or deny possessing nuclear bombs though it is widely believed to have them. It has refused to join the non-proliferation treaty along with three nuclear weapon states: India, Pakistan and North Korea.

I think this is a good move. Israel wants Iran to follow NPT, then it should do so itself. I find it hard to believe anyone could be opposed to this. I know Israel will ignore it, like they do most of the time with the UN unless it's over something they want, but it is good the world is critical of Israel and is watching.

What do you think?

Israel needs to accept that as a nuclear power, it should be subject to International Law. They have nuclear weapons as a deterrent, but they can not use that without limits. They should allow inspectors in, and sign the NPT. Other countries that have not signed it should also sign and ratify it.

[Nidaria]

This is about time. If Israel thinks it can bully other Middle-Eastern nations about their nuclear programs, it is about time that they let known their own nuclear program.

[IshCong]

I have absolutely no problem what so ever with having Israel's nuclear capabilities inspected by the UN. I'd even go so far as to say the US should have similar inspections, except for the the fact that America's nuclear capabilities are fairly well known at this point. IE: a lot.

Doesn't the US permit inspections?
Found this...?

[Tmutarakhan]

Nations have a free choice of whether to enter treaties. This argument that nations should be FORCED into "agreements" which they do not agree to is among the scarier positions on this thread.

So to take another treaty as an alternative example, it'd be wrong to force a nation to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention or the Biological Weapons Convention?

They would cease to be "agreements" if they were not agreed to. Ordinarily, getting a nation to sign a treaty is a matter of making it in that nation's interests to do so: Iran, as a signatory to the NPT, is entitled to freely trade with other nations in nuclear power-plant technology (which Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are not), and has been taking advantage of those favors, without living up to the corresponding obligations. I do not know the details on chemical or biological weapons treaties, but I would assume that likewise, adherence to those treaties confers rights to receive otherwise-restricted technologies; Saddam Hussein, for example, bought lots of restricted chemicals, on the pretense that they would be for other purposes-- he was a signatory to treaties which he violated.

[Neo Art]

I have absolutely no problem what so ever with having Israel's nuclear capabilities inspected by the UN. I'd even go so far as to say the US should have similar inspections, except for the the fact that America's nuclear capabilities are fairly well known at this point. IE: a lot.

Doesn't the US permit inspections?
Found this...?

Maybe I'm mistaken, I generally thought that the UN hasn't conducted inspects of America's nuclear arsenol for primarily redundancy reasons "IE we know they have them, they have a lot of them, they seem to be keeping a pretty good grip on them". But maybe active inspections are ongoing.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

So basically, the UN is threatening to condemn Israel because Israel has failed to join the NPT so that the UN can condemn them for not adhering to it?

[Potlimitomaha]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

This is the voice of reason. Finally i'm reading reality on an Israel thread

[Neo Art]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

This is the voice of reason. Finally i'm reading reality on an Israel thread

You find that a voice of reason? Really?

Really?

Let me guess, i'm an anti-semite for disagreeing, right?

[IshCong]

So basically, the UN is threatening to condemn Israel because Israel has failed to join the NPT so that the UN can condemn them for not adhering to it?

I'm not seeing anything about condemnation in the resolution...

[Sdaeriji]

This is the voice of reason. Finally i'm reading reality on an Israel thread

You find that a voice of reason? Really?

Really?

Let me guess, i'm an anti-semite for disagreeing, right?

You're a fucking Nazi.

[Saruhan]

The UN and its gang of anti-semitic dictators and other scum can go fuck themselves. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and to defend itself it needs to have a wide arsenal of different weapons that mustn't be revealed to the outside world.

This is the voice of reason. Finally i'm reading reality on an Israel thread

People should be careful about throwing out the word "Semite" in a thread about middle eastern people

[Tmutarakhan]

Maybe I'm mistaken, I generally thought that the UN hasn't conducted inspects of America's nuclear arsenol for primarily redundancy reasons

No, it's because the Big Five do not allow outsiders to spy on their nuclear programs. Why should they? The US and USSR have sometimes exchanged inspectors with each other, to verify compliance with disarmament agreements; they do not allow anybody else to.

This is the voice of reason. Finally i'm reading reality on an Israel thread

You find that a voice of reason? Really?

Really?

Let me guess, i'm an anti-semite for disagreeing, right?

Yes, potlimitomaha does really find Hippo a voice of reason. Hippo is the only one close to his own level of extremism.

[Vulpae]

This has nothing to do with anti-semitisim, it has to do with everyone playing by the same rules.
If isreal opens up, and iran does not, and it won't this will seriously undercut what little legitimacy they have in their accusations.
Let's be realistic, Isreal probably has nukes, I would be neither suprised, not condemn them for it, but they have to join the nuke club, and follow the rules if they do.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

So basically, the UN is threatening to condemn Israel because Israel has failed to join the NPT so that the UN can condemn them for not adhering to it?

I'm not seeing anything about condemnation in the resolution...

What else is the UN going to do if Israel still refuses to join the NPT? Condemnation seems to be just about the only thing they can do in response.

[Neo Art]

You find that a voice of reason? Really?

Really?

Let me guess, i'm an anti-semite for disagreeing, right?

You're a fucking Nazi.

Shut up Sjdari Sidaji Saskatchewan Bob

[IshCong]

Maybe I'm mistaken, I generally thought that the UN hasn't conducted inspects of America's nuclear arsenol for primarily redundancy reasons

No, it's because the Big Five do not allow outsiders to spy on their nuclear programs. Why should they? The US and USSR have sometimes exchanged inspectors with each other, to verify compliance with disarmament agreements; they do not allow anybody else to.

Source, please?

[IshCong]

I'm not seeing anything about condemnation in the resolution...

What else is the UN going to do if Israel still refuses to join the NPT? Condemnation seems to be just about the only thing they can do in response.

If Israel doesn't follow a non-binding resolution? Well, condemnation may be possible. Or they may just do nothing. Or...we'll see. I dislike jumping to conclusions based on speculation.

[Tmutarakhan]

This has nothing to do with anti-semitisim, it has to do with everyone playing by the same rules.
If isreal opens up, and iran does not, and it won't this will seriously undercut what little legitimacy they have in their accusations.
Let's be realistic, Isreal probably has nukes, I would be neither suprised, not condemn them for it, but they have to join the nuke club, and follow the rules if they do.

The "rules" are that if you do not join the NPT, you are not allowed to get nuclear-power-plant technology from participating nations. Israel has decided to forego that, since it has quite adequate nuclear scientists of its own (Einstein, who invented that whole idea in the first place, was not the only bright Jewish physicist). Iran, on the other hand, did join the NPT, and was given nuclear-power-plant technology which it did not develop on its own; the rules in that case are that it is required to admit inspectors, to verify that it is not developing weapons.