In a column for the Washington Post, Walter Pincus suggests that it is time for Israel to acknowledge its own alleged nuclear weapons. He writes:
It [Israel] has accused Iran of seeking the capability to produce nuclear weapons, when for years Israel has been believed to possess hundreds of nuclear bombs and missiles, along with multiple delivery systems. It continues to insist it doesn’t have them.
For one thing, Israel doesn’t insist that it doesn’t have nuclear weapons. It has maintained an ambiguous approach neither confirming nor denying that it is in possession of such weapons.
In any case, on the assumption that Israel does have nuclear weapons, why has Pincus fallen for Iranian efforts to deflect attention away from the very real danger? Unlike Iran, Israel has never threatened to wipe out another country in the region
Having made a false moral equivalence between Iranian and Israeli nuclear weapons, Pincus then goes on to do the same between Syrian chemical weapons and alleged Israeli chemical capabilities.
To back up his arguments, Pincus relies on quotes from Russian President Putin and Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif. Since when are these two international actors such paragons of virtue?
Referring to disarmament, Pincus asks: “Will Israel take that first diplomatic step?” Is he really so naive as to serious think that Israel proposing its own disarmament will do anything other than encourage radical forces in the Middle East to revisit their dreams of the destruction of Israel?
As a commentator on security affairs over many decades, it is surprising and disappointing to see Walter Pincus as an apologist for Iranian, Syrian and Russian agendas in the Middle East.
