TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Signed at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968
Ratification advised by U.S. Senate March 13, 1969
Ratified by U.S. President November 24, 1969
U.S. ratification deposited at Washington, London, and Moscow March 5, 1970
Proclaimed by U.S. President March 5, 1970
Entered into force March 5, 1970
Article VI
Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.
…………………..
Comment.
The “crisis” over Iran’s supposed attempts to acquire nuclear weapons technology is a fraud. In the first place, there is no evidence that Iran is doing it; only US-sponsored allegations and EU efforts to placate Bush while pushing him toward diplomacy. On the other hand, there is indisputable evidence that the US is very much in violation of Article VI above. The US has never taken a single step toward disarmament of its nuclear weapons arsenal, an arsenal that includes more than 5,000 nuclear bombs and the vehicles required for their transmission to designated targets. This is many times larger than the number of such weapons that would trigger a “nuclear winter” and cause the end of most life on Earth, including the human species. It isn’t very hard to see the real danger, except for the American media. Thus, any article about Iran’s potential violations that does not mention those of the US is pure propaganda.
In addition, it is virtually certain that the US aided Israel in acquiring nuclear weapons, in clear violation of the treaty’s Article I. Israel, India and Pakistan (and Cuba) have all refused to sign the treaty, but we hear not a word of complaint from the US government about their blatant violations and refusal to sign the treaty.
This is an obvious effort on the part of the Bush administration to develop a justification for war against Iran and foster anti-Muslim sentiment. Further proof of this motivation is their demand to bring the alleged Iranian violations before the UN Security Council, where it is preordained that either China or Russia will veto the US initiative. This will allow the US to again declare the UN ineffectual, thereby giving it a specious rationale for a unilateral attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
But Iran is a large, powerful and ancient country with a population that will rally to its defense. And the US has no army available to attack Iran on the ground and will have no military allies other than its sycophant and fellow treaty violator, Israel, for its aggression. Furthermore, an attack on Iran will doubtless trigger a Shiite uprising against US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you are surprised at the extent of the demonstrations inspired by the cartoons depicting Mohammed, try to imagine the worldwide Muslim response to a US-sponsored attack of Iran.
So what can the dolts who run this place be thinking? Do they really want “the clash of civilizations” between the Muslims and Christians? I, personally, have no dog in that fight and would like to excuse myself from the consequences. On the other hand, having Christian and Muslim fundamentalists killing each other off might not be such a bad idea if one could find a safe vantage point – perhaps Scott’s favorite, Costa Rica, wouldn’t be downwind.
My friend Dale would say that they want these wars because they raise oil prices through the roof. If you want to understand them, think about the Exxon/Mobil and the Halliburton bottom lines. Another possible explanation is that they really believe God is on their side and the resulting apocalypse might bring on “the Rapture,” thus sparing the Christians from having to deal further with those pesky non-believers. Myself, I’m dismayed. Are they stupid or crazy or apocalyptic or greedy imperialists or all of the above? Regardless, it’s another wonderful example of testosterone run amuck.
David Hamilton
