Saudi Nukes - that's the question! | Potential Saudi Nuke Purchase From Pakistan Remains A Mystery | Did Russia Just Threaten Turkey With Nuclear Weapons? | Saudi Arabia Minister Avoids Questions On Acquiring Nukes From Pakistan
- Get link
- Other Apps
Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia
Dahham Al-'Anzi's pronouncement
- Saudi Arabia Admits it Has NUCLEAR BOMBS; Will Test Within Weeks!
- Saudi Arabia Admits It Has NUCLEAR BOMBS - YouTube
- Dahham Al-'Anzi - Google Search
- Daham Al-'Anzi - Google Search
- SuperStation95 FM Radio - Google Search
- Saudi Political Analyst Dahham Al-'Anzi: KSA Has Obtained Nuclear Bomb. Test May Be Held Soon Russia Today TV (Russia) - February 15, 2016 - Google Search
- Daham Al-'Anzi Russia Today TV (Russia) - February 15, 2016 - Google Search
Searches
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia - Google Search
- saudi nukes - Google Search
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia and USA - Google Search
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia and Russia - Google Search
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia and Israel - Google Search
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia and CIA - Google Search
- saudi arabia - Google Search
- News - saudi arabia - Google Search
Articles
- Nuclear program of Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Why Saudi Arabia can’t get a nuclear weapon - The Washington Post
- The Ultimate Nightmare: North Korea Could Sell Saudi Arabia Nuclear Weapons | The National Interest
- Arab states are seeking nuclear weapons to counter Iran, Israel warns - Telegraph
- Israel: The Arab nuclear-arms race has begun « Hot Air
- Israeli Warning: Arab States Seeking Nukes to Counter Iran
- Ya’alon: Arab states are seeking out nukes in wake of Iran deal - Middle East - Jerusalem Post
- Israel’s Defense Minister Exposes Israel’s Divide-And-Conquer Regional Strategy
- Arab states are seeking nuclear...
- The diminished legacy of the Iran deal - The Washington Post
- Arab states fear nuclear deal will give Iran a bigger regional role - The Washington Post
- Iran Deal Leads Saudi Arabia to Consider Nuclear Options | TIME.com
- CIA: Saudi Arabia will go nuclear
- U.S. Relies Heavily on Saudi Money to Support Syrian Rebels - The New York Times
- Saudi Arabia just launched a massive military exercise - Business Insider
- Saudi Arabia spends $80 billion on its military - Business Insider
- The purpose of Saudi Arabia’s Islamic military coalition - Opinion - Jerusalem Post
- Russia and Saudi Arabia agree to cooperate in nuclear energy
- Gulf states seek nukes against Iran, had secret contacts with Tel Aviv – Israeli defense chief — RT News
- Medvedev: Saudi Arabia thinking about creating nuclear weapons | Russia Beyond the Headlines
- Телефонный разговор с Королём Саудовской Аравии Сальманом Бен Абдель Азизом Аль Саудом • Президент России
- 4868468Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister would neither confirm nor deny the potential purchase of a nuclear weapon from Pakistan recently, leaving one of the Middle East’s greatest security questions unanswered.Foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir remained coy Thursday when a CNN reporter asked him if his country had plans to buy a nuclear weapon from Pakistan. Speculation as to whether or not Saudi Arabia would purchase a nuclear weapon from fellow Sunni Muslim ally Pakistan has been rampant since the negotiations, and eventual agreement, on Iran’s nuclear program occurred in 2015.“I am not going to get into details of discussions we have with foreign governments, and certainly not allied governments. I’m sure you understand,” said Jubeir in response to the question Thursday, “I would not discuss these things in a public forum, certainly not on television.”Jubeir’s response follows Tuesday remarks made by Secretary of State John Kerry that any purchase of a nuclear weapon from Pakistan by Saudi Arabia would have “all kinds of [Non-proliferation treaty] consequences. I mean, there are huge implications of that.”The nuclear question has become part of an ongoing conflict between Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and it reached a fever pitch after Iranian protesters stormed the Saudi embassy in the Iranian capital of Tehran. The embassy assault came as a result of the execution of prominent Shia Muslim cleric Nimr al-Nimr by the Saudi government.Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif claimed in an interview with CNN today that “We [Iran] do not have a fight to pick with Saudi Arabia.”Zarif claims that Iran and Saudi Arabia can co-exist peacefully in the Middle East, but noted that “unfortunately, the Saudis have had the illusion that backed by their Western allies, they could push Iran out of the equation in the region.”Rumors of a Saudi nuclear purchase caught the public eye in May 2015 when the Sunday Times quoted an anonymous U.S. defense official as saying “the house of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward” to purchase a weapon “off-the-shelf” from Pakistan.“The Sunni states will play tit-for-tat and keep up with Iranian nuclear developments. Once they achieve a nuclear energy level of development, if Iran creates moves to create a nuclear weapon, states like Saudi Arabia will move rapidly to do the same and may even consider working with their strong partners like Pakistan,” said former U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in an interview in September 2015.Speculation on Saudi Arabia’s nuclear desires started in the 1990’s when former Saudi diplomat Muhammad Khilewi leaked documents claiming that Saudi Arabia had been interested in nuclear weaponry since 1975. Khilewi also claimed in a 1998 interview that Saudi Arabia had invested millions of dollars in the Pakistani nuclear program under the assumption that there would be a sort of nuclear quid-pro-quo between the two countries.While the “off-the-shelf” narrative has been popular, arms-control expert Jeffrey Lewis of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies believes that Saudi Arabia could be fully capable of developing a home-grown nuclear weapon. Lewis points to Saudi Arabia’s investment in peaceful nuclear research as evidence that it could pursue a domestic weapon.“The fancy machine tools, materials, and components that were good enough to build the nuclear weapons of the 1970s are widely available now,” wrote Lewis in a June 2015 article for Foreign Policy, “The Saudis are clearly alarmed by the possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon. While I suspect that a lot of the talk about acquiring nuclear weapons is intended to make the United States focus on Saudi security concerns, it doesn’t help to dismiss Riyadh’s anxieties by mocking their educational system and ability to go nuclear.”Send tips to russ@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.Read the whole story
· · ·The US investigative journalist Robert Parry has made an astonishing claim - and one that has gone completely unnoticed.He is reporting that the Russian government has warned Erdogan that Russia is prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons to defend its Syrian strike force from Turkish attack.Parry’s exact words are as follows:“A source close to Russian President Vladimir Putin told me that the Russians have warned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Moscow is prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons if necessary to save their troops in the face of a Turkish-Saudi onslaught.Since Turkey is a member of NATO, any such conflict could quickly escalate into a full-scale nuclear confrontation.”Generally I would be skeptical of such a story from an anonymous source. However Parry is a journalist of the highest reliability and integrity so there can be no doubt he actually has been told this by a real source.Of course it is possible the source is making the story up, or that he is not as close to Putin as Parry believes.However on 11th February 2016 Russia’s Security Council held a meeting the public report of which is unusually terse, whilst on the same day the Russian military reported to Putin about a series of military exercises arranged at short notice in their southern military district, which look like they were intended to prepare the Russian military for rapid action at short notice against Turkey should the need arise.If a warning really was given it might have been given either on that day or possibly on the day after, to coincide with the military exercises whose meaning in that case would not be lost on either the US or the Turks.The meeting of the Security Council (whose importance I discussed here) would in that case have been convened to discuss and authorise it.The fact Obama telephoned Putin a day later on 14th February 2016 might also be connected to the warning, if it really was given.Both the Turks and the Russians would surely have informed the US of such a warning. It would be entirely understandable in that case that the US President would want to discuss it with the Russian President. In fact it would be astonishing if he did not want to.If it was the warning Obama and Putin discussed, then that might explain why the US and the Russians are giving such completely different accounts of the conversation.Neither side would want to make the warning public - something which would escalate the crisis to stratospheric levels - and each would want to concoct a cover story to hide what was really discussed, which given the circumstances and the urgency they might be unlikely to coordinate with each other. That might explain why the accounts of the conversation differ so much.Against that it must be said that it is by no means unusual for Russian and Western governments to publish radically different accounts of conversations Russian and Western leaders have with each other.All this it should be stressed is speculation, though as is apparent it is consistent with some of the diplomatic and military moves.If such a warning really was given it would not be the first time the US or Russia have threatened to use nuclear weapons.The US for example warned Saddam Hussein in 1990 that it was ready to retaliate with nuclear weapons if he used chemical weapons against their troops in the First Gulf War.However a threat to use nuclear weapons is one that is never made lightly. If it really was made it shows how fraught the situation in Syria has become.If the Russians really did make such a threat then it would be a further reason why the US and its European allies would be urging Erdogan to act with restraint, and would be counselling him against plunging into a war with the Russians in Syria.I had already guessed this was the case (see here and here) and in the same article in which he reports the Russian threat Parry discusses this issue extensively.Confirmation that the Western powers are warning Erdogan against an invasion of Syria has now also come from the Financial Times (see “Turkey and Saudi Arabia consider Syria intervention”,Financial Times, 18th February 2016):“The US is seeking to rein in its allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia from military action in Syria if a ceasefire planned for today in the bloody civil war fails.Despite mounting regional frustration over Washington’s allegedly passive stance on the five-year-old conflict the Obama administration and other western powers are worried that direct military interventions could lead to an escalation of the conflict and a dangerous clash with Russia.“Are they going to deploy troops there? Not if we can help it,” said one senior Nato diplomat.””Each day now provides further news of advances by the Syrian army and its allies in northern Syria.The very latest information is that the last major rebel held town in Latakia province has been recaptured by the Syrian army, and that the Syrian army is just a few kilometres away from the city of Idlib.Slowly but surely the trap around the jihadi rebels in Aleppo is closing.Meanwhile - whether because of warnings from Moscow or Washington or for some other reason - the Turks and the Saudis have so far not matched their rhetoric with action.The much discussed Saudi aircraft deployment to the US airbase at Incirlik has turned out to be much smaller than initially reported, and may not actually have taken place.The Turks are publicly sticking to their position that they will not send their troops into Syria unilaterally - which could be taken to mean they will not invade Syria unless they have US agreement and unless the US contributes ground troops to the invasion force.Turkish action so far has been limited to cross-border shelling of Kurdish forces near Azaz and demands the Kurds stay away from Azaz, which is near the Turkish border and which the Turks say they want to make part of a buffer zone.Even these moves have been too much for some of Turkey’s NATO allies, provoking criticism by some NATO states of Turkey for its shelling of the Kurds, though claims the UN Security Council has passed a Resolution condemning Turkey’s actions are untrue.Interestingly the Western powers seem reluctant to endorse Turkey’s claims the Kurds of Iraq and Syria - as opposed to the Kurds of Turkey - were behind Wednesday’s terrorist attack on a military convoy in Ankara (see this discussion here), whilst Turkey’s response to the attack was to bomb Kurdish targets in Iraq rather than in Syria.The situation is still very tense and it is premature to say that the crisis - if one exists - is past.Whether because of Russian threats to use nuclear weapons or because of calls of restraint from the West and possibly from his own military or for some other reason, the signs for the moment however point to Erdogan backing off.With every day that passes without a Turkish ground invasion the prospects of it happening grow less. The next few weeks should decide the issue.Read the whole story
· · · · · ·
Saudi Arabia Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir said most countries are concerned over Iran getting billions of dollars as a result of the nuclear deal. (File Photo)Washington:
Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir has refused to publicly speak on reports that Riyadh was trying to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan, but said the Kingdom will do whatever it takes to protect itself."I am not going to get into details of discussions we have with foreign governments, and certainly not allied governments. I'm sure you understand," he said."I would not discuss these things in a public forum, certainly not on television," he told CNN when asked about nuclear cooperation with Pakistan.His remarks came a day after US Secretary of State John Kerry warned both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan against indulging in trade of nuclear weapons, saying there will be "all kinds of NPT consequences" if Riyadh went ahead with any such plan.The warning from Kerry came amid media reports that Saudi Arabia is trying to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan. Top Pakistani leaders have in recent weeks warned Iran of serious consequences if it attacked Saudi Arabia, which many analysts see as a nuclear threat from Islamabad to Tehran."Saudi Arabia is committed to two things. I always say two things we do not negotiate over, our faith and our security. Saudi Arabia will do whatever it takes in order to protect our nation and our people from any harm. And I will leave it at that," Al-Jubeir said."I discussed the bilateral relationship with Pakistan, which is a strategic one. We discussed the regional situation.We discussed ways to promote security and stability in the region. We discussed the negative and aggressive Iranian interference and the affairs of the region," he said.Responding to a question, the minister said Iran should seize interfering in the affairs of other regional countries."Iran should cease to support terrorism. Iran should cease to assassinate diplomats and blow up embassies. Iran should cease to support militias whose objective is to destabilise countries in the region. Iran should cease its policy of negative propaganda in the region. Other than that, things should be fine with Iran," he said.Al-Jubeir said most countries are concerned over Iran getting billions of dollars as a result of the nuclear deal."I think most countries in the world are concerned that Iran will use these funds in order to fund its nefarious activities rather than use them to develop its country and improve the living standards of its people. I hope I'm wrong," he said.Lashing out at Iran, he said Tehran harbours the leadership of Al-Qaeda, including one of Osama bin Laden's sons, and this is a country that has been aggressive and has demonstrated no inhibitions in using terrorism."This is a country that has provided troops and recruited troops in a sectarian war in Syria that has allowed Bashar al-Assad to murder more than 250,000 of his people and to render 12 million of them refugees or displaced persons," he said.Read the whole story
· · ·Saudi Arabia acceded to the as a in 1988 and since 1999 has expressed its support for the establishment of a -free zone in the Middle East. While the last decade has witnessed growing speculation about how Saudi Arabia might respond to Iran’s controversial nuclear program, most experts agree Riyadh remains unlikely to pursue for the foreseeable future, even if a nuclear-armedIran were to emerge. In recent years Saudi Arabia has expressed interest in an ambitious agenda to expand its civil nuclear power program, but it remains unclear whether its plans will come to fruition.HistorySaudi Arabia's interest in nuclear-related research dates back to the 1960s, and it has maintained a modest civilian nuclear program since the late 1970s. In 1977, Riyadh established a basic nuclear center known as the King Abd Al-Aziz Center for Science and Technology (KAACST). [1] A decade later, in 1988, the Kingdom established its Atomic Energy Research Institute (AERI) within KAACST, which has conducted research on "industrial applications of and radioactive , nuclear power and reactors, nuclear materials and radiation protection." [2] Since the late 1970s, Saudi scientists have conducted a series of studies into the feasibility of developing for electricity generation and desalination purposes, but Saudi Arabia has yet to acquire a . [3]Proliferation Concerns and Alleged Cooperation with Iraq and PakistanSpeculation regarding Saudi Arabia's nuclear weapons ambitions has periodically surfaced in the media. According to one report, "among the charges levelled at it have been that it possesses undeclared nuclear facilities; that it sought or may seek a nuclear security guarantee from a country other than the United States in return for energy supplies; and that it has attempted or planned for the outright purchase of a nuclear weapon and/or delivery system from another state." [4]Most of this speculation stems from allegations made by Muhammad Khilewi, a former Saudi diplomat who defected to the United States in the 1990s. Disclosing thousands of documents he claimed to have copied directly from official Saudi sources, Khilewi asserted that since 1975 Riyadh had sought to acquire nuclear weapons.[5] Khilewi maintained that following the 1973 Arab-Israeli War Saudi Arabia set up a clandestine program run out of the Al-Kharj nuclear research center at a remote military facility near the town of Al-Sulayyil southwest of Riyadh. [6] In a 1998 interview, he also claimed Saudi Arabia had spent millions to support the Iraqi and Pakistani nuclear weapons programs. [7] Riyadh has denied the veracity of Khilewi's statements, and most experts dismiss their credibility. [8]Allegations of Saudi Financial Assistance to Iraq's Nuclear Weapons ProgramAccording to Khilewi's documents, Riyadh provided Saddam Hussein with nearly $5 billion to finance Iraq's clandestine nuclear weapons program between 1975 and 1990. [9] Such funding was allegedly part of Saudi Arabia's broader financial support to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, which, according to Khilewi, amounted to $25 billion. [10] In exchange for its financial backing, Saudi Arabia would purportedly receive some of the Iraqi nuclear weapons once they were produced. In addition, Saudi scientists reportedly received nuclear weapons-related training in Iraq as part of the deal. [11] Khilewi claimed the cooperation ultimately collapsed with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.The Alleged Saudi-Pakistani Nuclear Quid Pro QuoAllegations that Saudi Arabia provided significant financial support for Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, possibly with the understanding that Islamabad would provide sensitive nuclear weapons-related technology or even extended deterrence in exchange, stem from claims made by Khilewi as well as numerous others. [12] Information in the public domain suggests Riyadh did provide financial assistance to Islamabad in the 1970s and 1980s, along with discounted oil supplies after the United States imposed following Pakistan's nuclear tests in 1998. [13] While Saudi aid enabled the program to continue, whether Riyadh directly financed the Pakistani bomb effort or had an explicit nuclear-related agreement with Islamabad remains subject to speculation.Several high-profile interactions have sparked further suspicions of a Saudi-Pakistani nuclear quid pro quo. In May 1999, Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan visited the plant and missile facility at Kahuta outside Islamabad, reportedly conducting a follow-up visit in 2002. [14] The notorious Pakistani scientist and black market purveyor of nuclear-related goods and technology, AQ Khan, traveled to Saudi Arabia in November 1999. [15] In October 2003, Crown Prince Abdullah visited Pakistan, a trip which an Israeli senior intelligence official reportedly told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee was intended to secure an agreement whereby Saudi Arabia would purchase Pakistani nuclear warheads to be placed atop Saudi missiles in the event Iran acquired nuclear weapons. [16] Others have speculated such an agreement might involve the stationing of Pakistani nuclear weapons on Saudi territory. [17] Both Riyadh and Islamabad have denied these allegations, and most analysts believe it highly unlikely Pakistan would ever follow through with such an agreement, were it to even exist, given a host of disincentives. [18]Iran and the Prospect of Saudi Reactive ProliferationNotwithstanding the speculation surrounding Saudi-Pakistani nuclear cooperation, Riyadh apparently initiated a review of its strategic policy around 2003 in light of its changing security environment. Based on a leaked strategy paper, a September 2003 report published in The Guardian alleged the strategic reassessment involved the consideration of three options: pursuing an indigenous nuclear ; maintaining or entering into an alliance with an existing nuclear power; or seeking a regional agreement establishing a in the Middle East. [19] The Saudi government denied that such a document existed at the time. More recently, however, Saudi officials have apparently issued explicit warnings about Riyadh's intention to acquire nuclear weapons in the event Iran does. According to a senior U.S. official, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia warned in 2009 that if Iran acquired nuclear weapons, "we will get nuclear weapons." [20] Saudi officials have reportedly signaled similar intentions on several occasions since then. [21] However, many analysts argue that such pronouncements are simply bluster aimed at drawing U.S. attention towards Saudi Arabia's concerns about Iran's nuclear program, in the hopes of securing additional security assurances from the United States. [22]Recent Developments and Current StatusSaudi Arabia currently possesses a limited civil nuclear infrastructure consisting of a three-megavolt Tangetron accelerator, a 350 kilovolt light-ion accelerator, and a cyclotron. The accelerators are housed at the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals and are used to conduct experiments in nuclear physics, while the cyclotron is used to produce at the King Fasisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center in Riyadh. [23] The knowledge required to operate such facilities is basic, and not applicable to the development of nuclear weapons. [24] In addition to operating these facilities, Saudi scientists conduct lab research and experiments in nuclear science, including through the operation of a cobalt-60 facility. [25] The Kingdom has no known conversion, enrichment, or fuel-fabrication facilities, nor does it possess any power reactors or a capability. Some AERI laboratories conduct research on physical and chemical separation and radiochemistry, making them potentially suitable for small-scale reprocessing, "though not in quantities that would present a proliferation risk." [26]Saudi Arabia acceded to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state in 1988, and signed a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the in 2005, eventually bringing it in 2009. At the time Riyadh signed its agreement, however, it qualified it with a Small Quantities Protocol (SQP). This measure exempts countries with little or no nuclear material from regular inspections, but the IAEA has tried to convince countries with SQPs to rescind or update them, as they limit the Agency's ability to verify no undeclared nuclear activities are taking place, and that a country does not possess more nuclear material than allowed by the protocol. [27] Saudi Arabia will eventually be forced to do away with its SQP if its plans to further develop its civil nuclear program come to fruition.Over the past decade, Saudi Arabia has shown a renewed interest in further developing its civil nuclear program. The Kingdom has played a central role in the Gulf Cooperation Council's (GCC) efforts to launch a regional initiative in 2006 to examine and eventually develop a joint civil program. [28] Parallel to the GCC initiative, Riyadh has also taken a series of steps to develop commercial relationships with major nuclear suppliers, signing a memorandum of understanding with the United States in 2008, as well as cooperative agreements with France (February 2011), Argentina (June 2011), South Korea (November 2011), and China (January 2012). [29] Riyadh is also reportedly in the process of negotiating nuclear cooperation agreements with the United States, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, and Russia. [30] This flurry of activity occurred in the midst of Saudi Arabia's announcement in June 2011 of an ambitious plan to build sixteen nuclear power reactors over the next two decades, aiming to bring the first reactor online by 2022. [31] Most experts viewed this timetable as highly unrealistic, and indeed, as of mid-2015 no meaningful progress had been made toward achieving it. [32]Sources - In a shocking development, Saudi Arabia has now publicly admitted they possess NUCLEAR BOMBS. The bombs will protect the ground invasion of Syria by Turkey and Saudi Arabia. . . which puts the Russians in the unenviable position of having to use nuclear weapons to defend themselves and Syria.Speaking in a television interview Dahham Al-'Anzi of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was discussing why many in the Arab world feel the need for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to be removed from power, and that a ground invasion was not only necessary, but is going to take place!In the context of the pending invasion, Dahham Al-'Anzi outlined the missiles, planes and other war-fighting equipment the Kingdom has acquired and then revealed "We have a nuclear bomb" and asked the TV Interviewer, "Why do you think we have all these weapons?" He then answered his own question "to protect Arabs and Muslims."Not content to have revealed this staggering information, Dahham Al-'Anzi went further and stated "We may test it within weeks."
The stunned TV Interviewer said "This is breaking news, I haven't heard this before" to which Dahham Al-'Anzi replied "This isn't breaking news, the super powers have known about this for awhile."
There is much more information coming in regards to this story, we are getting the info out as fast as we can given the intense need to verify and corroborate it before we report.To watch the full 1m30s minute video yourself, click https://youtu.be/e-LMwVoQbS4RUSSIAN TROOPS IN SYRIA TO BE OVER-RUNWith Saudi Arabia presently hosting military "exercises" with some 300,000 troops in the northern part of its country, and Turkey massing tanks and troops in the southern part of their country, it is becoming clear that Syria will be over-run within hours once the Saudis (and their coalition) and the Turks, strike from both the north and the south.Russia has a policy of using tactical nuclear weapons if they are faced with being over-run.When the ground ivasion of Syria begins -- likely within days -- Russia will have to make one of two choices:- Strike with tactical nukes to defend themselves, OR;
- Be totally humiliated by being over-run by a bunch of Arab camel jockeys with filthy rags on their heads.
If Russia strikes, then it is clear that Saudi Arabia will use full-sized nuke(s) against the Russian base at Latakia and perhaps even against the country of Russia itself! In either case, if someone nukes Russian troops, it is clear Russia will strike back.The question is, who?Does Russia strike Riyadh, Mecca and Medina - which would rid the world of much trouble from a religion with stone age values and barbarc rituals and practices? Or does Russia strike both Saudi Arabia AND Turkey since both are attacking?And if Russia uses tactical nukes INSIDE SYRIA, and Saudi Arabia launches from outside Syria, what will the US and NATO do?Neither the US nor NATO want a nuclear war with Russia. No sane person wants a nuclear war with anyone!But what will the US do? The US is in an impossible predicament:1) If the US strikes Russia, Russia will strike back - and millions of us in both countries, die.2) If the US fails to strike back, then no US ally will ever believe our promise to defend them!In either case, we here in the US, and our brethren in Russia, are being set up to destroy each other, by a group of Muslim fanatics. We should not fall into a trap where Christian USA and Christian Russia do battle over Muslim madmen in the Middle East.Perhaps a better choice would be for the US, Russia and China to meet together and agree to jointly wipe out the entire Middle East in one, huge strike of intercontinental ballistic missiles. All three countries are sophisticated enough to achieve "Time-On-Target" arrival of our missiles, so all their cities detonate at precisely the same time. It would actually be merciful; they wouldn't know what hit them.Once the radiation clears, we would go in jointly, re-establish the oil systems, and equally divide the spoils amongst ourselves.This would wipe out a barbaric group of troublemakers who have done NOTHING but bring misery and death to the world for centuries. Remember, these people have been in that area for several thousand years yet in all that time, they never knew there was oil under them and never knew how to look for it. It wasn't until we in the west came and discovered the oil that they began to reap the benefits of the civilized world.Our ingenuity and advanced societies enabled the Arabs to gain riches beyond the dreams of avarice, and allowed their people to become educated, live in homes instead of tents and drive cars instead of Camels. (Although there are still a few who choose to live in tents and drive Camels to this very day!)But make no mistake, a tiger cannot change its stripes. On the surface, they dress well and speak well, but beneath the surface, their true nature and the culture it has spawned, remains the same. Greedy, shifty, corrupt, barbarians!Want proof? How have they repaid the west for discovering the oil beneath their lands which made them rich? They engage in price-fixing to squeeze the most money out of us as they can. They recruit, train and equip barbarians to wage "Jihad" invade peaceful peoples and destroy sacred antiquities. They codify in their laws, hideous practices of beheadings, stoning, mutilation.Let's be clear: Just because it is "law" doesn't raise it above barbarism. In that same light, just because they dress in expensive clothes, are educated in the finest schools, live in homes instead of tents, drive cars instead of Camels and enjoy all our high technology inventions, doesn't raise themfrom barbarism. True nature cannot be changed.A coordinated strike by the US, Russia and China would cleanse the world of filthy, brutal, savagery. It would insure the peace for hundreds of years, and secure all of our energy needs for longer than that.Perhaps this last item is the best option for the civilized world.While this is not a choice that we here at a radio station can make, or carry out, we know what our choice would be if it were within our lawful power to do so. Since it is not within our lawful power, we will simply wait to see what actions are undertaken by those we vest with the lawful authority to act.Read the whole story
· · · · ·Ahmad Masood/REUTERSMembers of Saudi security forces in a military parade.
When British Aerospace Engineering, better known as BAE Systems, announced a bumper set of annual results this week, much of that success was down to the lavish spending of the Saudi air force.The Persian Gulf state took delivery of £800 million ($1.14 billion) worth of BAE's Eurofighter Typhoon jet during 2015, boosting its airborne presence and the coffers of BAE. It is set to buy even more this year.But it's not just British-made planes that Saudi Arabia buys. In fact, it has one of the best-funded defence forces in the Middle East.The kingdom spends 25% of its budget, or about £56 billion ($80 billion), on its military. That is about double what it spends on health and social development.It has been throwing its weight around recently, engaging in a war in Yemen and joining forces with Turkey against Syrian President Bashar Assad.So here's what all that money has bought it:Read the whole story
· ·Saudi Arabia just launched what it describes as the largest war game in the country's history.On February 14, the "Northern Thunder" military exercise began, involving troops from 20 countries.Saudi Arabia's state news describes Northern Thunder as "the largest military exercise of its kind in terms of the number of participating countries and qualitative military equipment."David Weinberg, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Business Insider that Riyadh's claims shouldn't be taken at face value — and that the exercise might not have a specific political objective either."Even year in recent years the Saudis announce some sort of 'biggest' military exercise, and people always try to find a message," Weinberg says, noting that Northern Thunder includes participants like Egypt, Pakistan, and Oman "which have balked at recent Saudi military requests."Still, the exercise comes at a time when Riyadh is badly in need of effective hard-power projection.Saudi Arabia is in an ambiguous geopolitical position, losing on a number of important fronts while gaining in military power and regional importance.In Syria, Russian and Iranian support has enabled crucial battlefield gains for the regime of Bashar al-Assad — advances that have come at the expense of Saudi-supported rebel groups.The Saudi-led intervention in Yemen, which is fighting to restore the country's internationally recognized government after Iranian-backed Houthi rebels deposed it in early 2015, has made little progress in recent months and is widely thought of as a strategic misstep.Thomson ReutersSaudi troops walk at their base in Yemen's southern port city of Aden.
The recent agreement between Saudi Arabia, Russia, Qatar, and Venezuela to cap oil production could lead to an OPEC production-level freeze that would hurt Iran, restraining the Saudi rival's output just as international sanctions against the country are lifted.At the same time, Saudi Arabia's primary regional opponent still plans on spending a reported $8 billion on Russian arms and is seeing its global standing improve after the January implementation of its nuclear deal with a US-led group of world powers.Reuters
Saudi Arabia is facing internal pressures as well.Low oil prices are forcing Riyadh to cut social services and impose unprecedented taxation measures, while the government plans on raising money through privatizing some of Saudi Aramco, the country's multitrillion-dollar state oil concern.Despite these challenges, Saudi Arabia is arguably the most powerful of the Arab states, thanks in part to its low breakeven price for oil production and the effect of ongoing conflict and dysfunction on traditional regional leaders like Syria, Egypt, and Iraq.Despite cuts in its defense budget, Saudi was the world's third-largest military spender in 2015 and its largest arms importer in 2014.Riyadh has also carried out increasing military exercises in order to display the country's firepower, Weinberg explained to Business Insider."The increasing tempo of major Saudi military exercises reflects the kingdom’s broader investment in military spending and operational capacity, which is first and foremost driven by the perceived conventional and unconventional threats posed by Iran."An exercise like Northern Thunder sends the message that Saudi Arabia intends to keep up an assertive regional policy despite its recent setbacks.Read the whole story
· · · · · ·In addition to blowing the cover on Israel’s secret dealings with the Gulf states to target Iran, the defense minister expressed Israel’s hope that Syria might be divided up into ethnic enclaves, each ruled by mini-warlords.
Moshe Yaalon, Defence Minister of Israel, gestures during his speech at the Security Conference in Munich, Germany, Sunday, Feb. 14, 2016. (AP Photo/Matthias Schrader)SEATTLE (ANALYSIS) — Israel’s defense minister spoke with uncharacteristic bluntness recently as he outlined Israel’s geopolitical strategy regarding two critical fronts in the nation’s relations with its neighbors: the Saudi-Iran proxy war and Syria.Speaking at the annual Munich security conference, Moshe Ya’alon was even so bold as to blow the cover on Israel’s secret dealings with the Gulf states, chief among them Saudi Arabia. He trumpeted Israel’s inroads into the Salafist Sunni Arab world, Haaretz reported:“The defense minister noted channels of communication that Israelis have with neighboring Sunni Arab countries. ‘Not only Jordan and Egypt,’ he noted. ‘I speak about the Gulf states and North African states too. … For them, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood are the enemy. … Iran is the bad guy for us and for the Sunni regimes. They are not shaking hands [with Israelis] in public, but we meet in closed rooms.’”Though the defense minister did not expound upon this point, such a strategy is part of Israel’s attempt to divide and conquer the region in order to maintain its own sway. If the Sunni and Shiite worlds are at each other’s throats, it becomes much easier for Israel to pursue its own interests, which primarily revolve around maintaining a permanent occupation of historic Palestine.Ya’alon, a bluff and blustery former Israeli Defense Forces chief of staff, is not known for nuance or diplomatic tact. His presumption in telling a major international security conference that Israel had essentially co-opted the Gulf states was a bit too much for the senior Saudi representative, former security chief Prince Turki al-Faisal. But al-Faisal’s response took the form more of a slap on the wrist than a genuine rebuff. Haaretz reported:“Prince Faisal … asked for permission to speak. Handshakes with Israelis have not helped the Palestinians much, he said. Ya’alon was correct with regard to his comments regarding the animosity between the Sunni countries on one hand and Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood on the other … but … by the same measure the Sunni Arab countries are furious with Israel over the occupation and its treatment of the Palestinians. ‘Why should the Arabs feel friendship to you when you do that [to the Palestinians]?’ he asked.”Israeli defense minister rejects link between Palestine, larger regional conflicts
The former general then offered the conventional Israeli response in similar situations: Palestine has nothing to do with developments in the rest of the region.Ya’alon maintained there was no connection between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and current problems elsewhere in the Middle East. He argued:“There is a conflict with the Palestinians – but what is the linkage between this and the Iranian revolution? ISIS [the Islamic State organization] has a connection to the conflict? The civil war in Syria or the uprising in Tunisia? The situation in Yemen or Iraq? There is no connection.”Ya’alon’s response was unconvincing at best. Think how Jews in the Diaspora reacted when they believed Israel’s existence was threatened just before the 1967 War. Israel’s coffers were filled with today’s equivalent of billions of dollars in contributions. Young people dropped their lives to travel there to help the war effort. Thousands of Jews eventually decided to make aliyah, or emigrate, in solidarity.If this was true for Diaspora Jews, why would the Arab world not feel precisely the same way about Palestine? What holds true for Israel’s relationship with the Diaspora holds equally true for the Arab world. Palestine’s continuing subjugation may not be the 800-pound gorilla in the room, but it is a hefty obstacle undermining regional stability.No less a figure than Vice President Joe Biden and two of America’s then-most senior generals agreed with such an assessment, warning in 2010 that Israel’s continuing rejectionism endangered the lives of U.S. troops in the region.
Israeli Defense Minister Yaalon shakes hands with former Saudi intelligence chief, Turki al-Faisal. (Photo: Ariel Harmoni/ Israel Defense Ministry)But the wide smiles which graced both the faces of Ya’alon and al-Faisal as they shook hands after their colloquy spoke volumes about the real import of the interaction. The Saudi remonstrance was just for show; the Palestinians are an expendable commodity for them. What worries Israel more than occupation is Iran. And if Israel can help them against Iran, the Saudis will jettison their Arab brothers in Palestine.Uniting against Iran
For years, the Saudis have maintained a semi-covert relationship with Israel. They have coordinated strategy in their joint fight against Iran. The Saudis are reputed to have invested $1 billion to support Israel’s assassination campaign against Iranian nuclear scientists and the Stuxnet sabotage operation against the Iranian nuclear program. Top intelligence officials have met secretly in Israel and elsewhere.
People gather around a car as it is removed by a mobile crane in Tehran, Iran, Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2012. Two assailants on a motorcycle attached magnetic bombs to the car of an Iranian university professor working at a key nuclear facility, killing him and wounding two bystanders. (AP Photo/Fars News Agency, Meghdad Madadi)Besides the religious schism between Sunni and Shiite Islam which fuels the rivalry between Riyadh and Tehran, there is an even more potent economic factor driving the enmity: oil. Saudi Arabia is one of the largest exporters of oil in the world, and oil happens to be the only thing the mono-economy has that the world wants.The House of Saud also views itself as a regional power and leader of the Muslim world. Now emerging from decades of international isolation, Iran has promised to ramp up oil production to 1 million barrels a day in an already depressed oil market.Further, Iran has everything going for it which Saudi Arabia does not: youth; an entrepreneurial economy; technical know-how; a well-educated population; and an openness to the outside world. In regional terms, Iran is on the way up and Saudi Arabia on the decline. All of these factors contribute to stoking Saudi hatred of the Iranians.When the Saudis sought to pressure the United States not to broker the P5+1 nuclear deal, they let it be known that they and Israel were prepared to go it alone in the fight; even if it might mean attacking their Shiite enemy.Egyptian dictator cozies up to Netanyahu
The Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson’s Israeli paper, Makor Rishon, reported (in Hebrew; English version can be found here) that the U.S.-based Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations recently visited with Egyptian dictator Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi in Cairo. During the meeting, the Egyptian leader reportedly told them:“[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] is a leader with enormous strengths which aid him not only in leading his own country, but to advance the region itself and the whole world.”
Egyptian dictator al-Sisi meets with Israel Lobby leaders after praising Netanyahu for his “leadership” of the world.These are Israel’s allies in the region: the dictators, the inbred royal families, the oligarchs, the warlords, and the Nusra Front, al-Qaida’s affiliate in Syria. What does it say about Israel itself that it gravitates toward strongman rulers and away from the the region’s democracies and Arab Spring activists?The Conference of Presidents’ chairman, Stephen Greenberg, offered el-Sissi the quid pro quo kiss of legitimacy he was seeking back in Washington when he said:“I … think it would be very important for the American administration to welcome President Sisi at some point to the United States. That would be a major boost to them.”Israel advocates cantonization of Syria
Defense minister Ya’alon dropped another bombshell in Munich when he declared the Israel views the Syrian ceasefire brokered by Russia and the U.S. with as much skepticism as it views the nuclear agreement with Iran. The defense minister said that the best outcome in Syria, as far as Israel was concerned, was for the country to be divided into smaller cantons ruled by individual ethnic groups.Reuters quoted him as saying:“Unfortunately we are going to face chronic instability for a very, very long period of time. And part of any grand strategy is to avoid the past, saying we are going to unify Syria. We know how to make an omelette from an egg. I don’t know how to make an egg from an omelette.”According to Reuters, he continued: “We should realise that we are going to see enclaves – ‘Alawistan’, ‘Syrian Kurdistan’, ‘Syrian Druzistan’. They might cooperate or fight each other.”A few years into the Syrian civil war, I speculated that Israel’s goal was for Syria to disintegrate into small ethnic enclaves, each ruled by mini-warlords. This would defang Syria as a unified nation, disable any attempt to project Syrian power in the region, and disrupt Israeli geostrategic interests. Most important, it would short-circuit Syria’s ongoing determination to wrest the Golan from Israel, territory seized from it in 1967.This is a plan which Israel has followed for decades. Prior historical examples include the creation of the Southern Lebanese Army to enforce Israel’s territorial encroachment on Lebanon from 1982 until 2000, when the IDF finally abandoned its incursion. Before that, Israeli intelligence agents facilitated the foundation of Hezbollah as a buffer against rising PLO strength in Lebanon. Israel also aided in the foundation of Hamas, designed to act as a competitor against the PLO. All of these were attempts to weaken an enemy by dividing it internally.As cynical as it might be to say this, Israel’s goal was for rivers of blood to flow in Syria. And that’s exactly what’s happened. The more Syrians killed each other, the less they would kill Israelis. Chaos in Syria was Israel’s friend. Leading Islamophobe analyst Daniel Pipes advocated such a view, and it clearly resonated with Israeli military strategic and policy analysts as well.It is difficult to see within the morass that is the current Syrian conflict what is the right solution. But anyone who favors the outright overthrow of Syrian President Bashar Assad, no matter how brutal a tyrant he has proven, must reckon with the fact that this is an outcome Israel favors as well. And if Israel favors it, it does not bode well for Syria.Print This Story
Read the whole story
· · · · · · · · · · · ·“We see signs that countries in the Arab world are preparing to acquire nuclear weapons, that they are not willing to sit quietly with Iran on the brink of a nuclear or atomic bomb,” stated Moshe Ya’alon.Ya’alon did not offer any specifics about which Arab countries may be seeking nuclear weapons.Ya’alon said he believes Iran could abandon the nuclear accord and attempt to develop nuclear capabilities. “If at a certain stage they feel confident, particularly economically, they are liable to make a break for the bomb.”Speaking to reporters after a recent meeting with Jordan’s King Abdullah, Ya’alon said Arab countries in the Middle East do not trust that Iran will abide by the international nuclear accord implemented last summer.He said the Jewish state was closely monitoring Iran’s actions regarding the nuclear deal “because over many years the Iranians have been deceitful about their nuclear program.”Last month, Breitbart Jerusalem reported an influential pro-government Saudi newspaper had recommended that the kingdom take immediate steps to join the nuclear club.The Al-Riyadh daily urged the country’s leaders to begin establishing a “clear road map for a civilian nuclear program.” The goal should be to open the first Saudi nuclear reactor by 2030 – one year before most of the significant constraints on Iran’s nuclear program lapse.Last May, the Sunday Times of London cited unnamed senior American officials claiming Saudi Arabia had “taken the ‘strategic decision’ to acquire ‘off-the-shelf’ atomic weapons from Pakistan.” The Saudi Defense Ministry rejected the claims.In 2012, the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy, the Saudi nuclear body, recommended the kingdom install 17 gigawatts of nuclear power, but no plan has been publicly issued to meet that goal.In March, Olli Heinonen, former deputy director of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency, told this reporter that the nuclear negotiations with Tehran had already prompted Mideast and Persian Gulf countries to seek a nuclear infrastructure.He pointed out that Russia that same month inked a $10 billion deal to build a nuclear power plant in Jordan. Egypt last February signed a preliminary agreement with Russia for a nuclear plant. And the United Arab Emirates in 2009 finalized a $20 billion contract with Korea Electric Power Corporation for a power plant that is currently under construction.Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.Read the whole story
· ·posted at 8:41 pm on February 15, 2016 by Ed Morrissey
Who could have predicted that the deal John Kerry and Barack Obama cut with Iran would lead to a nuclear-arms race in the region? Well … everyone, really, especially since the deal frees Iran up after 15 years (or less) to openly pursue nuclear weapons, and gives them massive resources to covertly pursue them in the short run, too. Israel’s defense minister Moshe Ya’alon says that unnamed Sunni nations in the region have begun to prepare themselves for a nuclear Iran already, thanks to the deal:Israel has picked up signs of the beginning of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East as Arab states seek nuclear weapons to counter Iran, the Israeli defence minister has warned.<Moshe Ya’alon said Sunni Arab nations were not reassured by last year’s nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers and were making their own preparations for nuclear weapons.“We see signs that countries in the Arab world are preparing to acquire nuclear weapons, that they are not willing to sit quietly with Iran on brink of a nuclear or atomic bomb,” Mr Ya’alon said.“Acquire” could have two meanings. These immensely wealthy nations — Saudi Arabia, of course, but other emirates in the region as well — could spend money to create a native nuclear-weapons development program. It would be a lot easier to simply buy weapons from Pakistan, which has been a nuclear-armed nation for decades. It’s not as if the Pakistani defense establishment has been shy about sharing their secrets in the past, after all. It would be surprising if the Saudis and others haven’t already acquired the technology for a jump-start on an arms race, especially since it was clear for months that the Obama administration was ready to throw in the towel on isolating Iran.The Telegraph mentions Israel’s role — of necessity, not choice — in determining just how well Iran adheres to the agreement. That makes them a key player for these same Sunni nations, andBenjamin Netanyahu wants them to acknowledge it. Speaking to a coalition of American Jewish groups, the prime minister insisted that some of these nations are covert allies of Israel, and with the threat from Iran looming, it’s time for those ties to become public:Addressing the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the prime minister maintained that most moderate Arab countries see Israel as their ally, not their enemy, as they share a common struggle against Iran and the Islamic State.“Major Arab countries are changing their view of Israel … they don’t see Israel anymore as their enemy, but they see Israel as their ally, especially in the battle against militant Islam with its two fountainheads,” he said in English. “Now, this is something that is forging new ties, many of them discreet, some of them open. And I think there too we can expect and should expect and should ask to see a change.”Er … don’t hold your breath on that one. Most of these Sunni nations have a substantial minority Shi’ite population, and any official link to Israel in opposition to Iran will inflame already-tense internal politics. Far better for Israel to maintain the “discreet” links and stabilize their security rather than risk a further meltdown in the region by demanding alliances be made public. Netanyahu knows this, too; this message is intended to remind Americans of Israel’s increasing strength in the chaos surrounding it, and hopefully to keep pressure on Washington not to interfere with it.Related Posts:Read the whole story
· · ·Next Page of StoriesLoading...Page 2Advocates of the nuclear deal, including President Barack Obama, argue that the agreement heads off a Middle East arms race as Iran's nuclear capabilities are rolled back.But Mr Ya'alon said Iran was liable to break the agreement as their economic situation improves with the lifting of international sanctions. "If at a certain stage they feel confident, particularly economically, they are liable to make a break for the bomb."Even if the agreement for Iran to limit its nuclear enrichment holds, Mr Ya'alon said its 15-year expiry date was "just around the corner".He did not specify which Arab nations were making nuclear preparations but Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Sunni states, is considered the most likely candidate.Its vast oil wealth could help fund a nuclear programme while its ties with Pakistan, a nuclear power, could provide technical expertise.The United Arab Emirates (UAE) also has oil money and is already building a civilian nuclear power programme, though there is no evidence it is moving to develop weapons.Mr Ya'alon made the claim after meeting the king of Jordan, one of only two Arab states with which Israel has diplomatic ties.While Israel's government tried vigorously to derail the nuclear deal, the Israeli military has acknowledged that the agreement has at least bought time before a confrontation with Iran.Gadi Eisenkot, the head of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), said earlier this year that the deal contained "many risks" but also "opportunities" for Israel.Israel, which secretly built its own nuclear weapons in the 1960s, is now playing a somewhat constructive role in helping to monitor the implementation of the deal, according to Western diplomats.Israel has helped provide technical knowledge and intelligence as the world tries to make sure Iran is abiding by the terms of the agreement, they said.Mr Ya'alon said Israel was following the implementation closely "because over many years the Iranians have been deceitful about their nuclear programme".Read the whole story
· · ·Russia and Saudi Arabia yesterday signed an agreement to cooperate in the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The document was signed by Rosatom director general Sergey Kirienko and the president of the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (KA-CARE) Hashim Abdullah Yamani.Rosatom said the document creates for the first time in the history of Russian-Saudi relations a legal basis for cooperation in the field of nuclear energy, in areas that include, among others: the design, construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power and research reactors, including desalination plants and particle accelerators; the provision of nuclear fuel cycle services, including nuclear power plants and research reactors; the management of used nuclear fuel and radioactive waste management; the production of radioisotopes and their application in industry, medicine and agriculture; and, the education and training of specialists in the field of nuclear energy.The agreement envisages the formation of a coordination committee for further discussion on the uses of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, as well as the formation of joint working groups to carry out specific projects and research, the exchange of experts, the organization of seminars and workshops, assistance in education and the training of scientific and technical personnel, and the exchange of scientific and technical information.In March, state-owned R&D companies from Argentina and Saudi Arabia set up a joint venture company, Invania, to develop nuclear technology for Saudi Arabia's nuclear power program. The foundation of Invania, between Taqnia of Saudi Arabia and Invap of Argentina, was announced by Argentina's federal planning ministry and Invap during a visit by the Saudi Arabian consultative assembly, the Shura Council. Invania was established under a nuclear cooperation agreement signed by the two countries in 2011.Earlier the same month, Saudi Arabia and South Korea signed a memorandum of understanding that could enable at least two South Korean-designed SMART reactors to be built in Saudi Arabia. The two countries are to jointly promote the 330 MWt pressurized water reactor with integral steam generators and advanced safety features in the global market. They signed a cooperation agreement on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy in November 2011.Although Saudi Arabia's nuclear program is in its infancy, the kingdom has plans to construct 16 nuclear power reactors over the next 20 years. A 2010 royal decree identified nuclear power as essential to help meet growing energy demand for both electricity generation and water desalination while reducing reliance on depleting hydrocarbon resources.Researched and written
by World Nuclear NewsRead the whole story
· ·Some countries are thinking about creating nuclear bombs after what has happened in North Africa and the Middle East, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has said."I remember when I was informally [communicating] with the leaders of Arab countries within the framework of the League of Arab States I was delicately told: you know, we have been receiving information that Iran has been working, and someone else has been working too, and anything can happen in the region. Colleagues from Saudi Arabia told us they would also think about it, given the circumstances," Medvedev told Time in an interview.Many countries "are seriously thinking" about creating their own nuclear bomb "after a series of events, including those in North Africa, the Middle East," he said."The provoking of the creation of nuclear weapons" is a serious danger, the prime minister said.Read more: How likely is an armed conflict between Russia and Turkey?
Now the Saudis have raised the alarming prospect of the Middle East becoming embroiled in a nuclear arms race after the country’s blunt warning that “all options are on the table” if Iran fails to resolve the international stand-off over its nuclear programme.Prince Mohammed bin Nawwaf bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, Saudi Arabia’s long-serving ambassador to London, says that for many years the kingdom upheld the policy established by the late King Fahd that Riyadh would not pursue a policy of developing nuclear weapons. “Then it became known that Iran was pursuing a policy that could be shifted to a weapons-of-mass-destruction programme,” Prince Mohammed explained in an exclusive interview with The Daily Telegraph. “This has changed the whole outlook in the region.”The Saudi ambassador to the United Kingdom (Photo: GETTY)
Like many in the Arab world and beyond, the Saudis are hoping the current negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue, being led by US President Barack Obama, will provide assurances that Tehran does not possess the means to build an atom bomb.“We have always expressed our support for resolving the Iranian nuclear file in a diplomatic way and through negotiation,” said Prince Mohammed. “We commend the American president’s effort in this regard, provided that any deal reached is watertight and is not the kind of deal that offers Iran a licence to continue its destabilising foreign policies in the region. The proof is in the pudding.”Negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 – the US, the UK, France, China and Russia (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council) and Germany – are due to be concluded by the end of this month. Negotiators are pressing Tehran to freeze key elements of its uranium-enrichment cycle – which can be used to produce nuclear warheads – in return for easing the sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy.Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef with Barack Obama (Photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Despite attempts lasting more than a decade to resolve the issue, Iran has yet to make any significant concessions on its nuclear programme. The New York Times reported last week thatTehran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel had increased by 20 per cent in the past 18 months. That would make a nonsense of the Obama administration’s contention that Iran had frozen its enrichment operations for the duration of the negotiations. Consequently, there are fears in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states that Mr Obama is more interested in reaching an accommodation with reformists in Iran than in standing by America’s traditional allies in the Arab world.Prince Mohammed, who is a senior member of the Saudi ruling family, insists the negotiations must produce serious commitments from Iran not to produce nuclear weapons. “We hope we receive the assurances that guarantee Iran will not pursue this kind of weapon,” he said. “But if this does not happen, then all options will be on the table for Saudi Arabia.“Iran’s nuclear programme poses a direct threat to the entire region and constitutes a major source and incentive for nuclear proliferation across the Middle East, including Israel.”Saudi security forces on parade (Photo: Getty Images)
Western intelligence agencies believe that the Saudi monarchy paid for up to 60 per cent of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, in return for the ability to buy warheads for itself at short notice. Any failure by Iran to provide the necessary safeguards by the end of this month could see Riyadh activate that deal, thereby enabling Saudi Arabia to become the Arab world’s first nuclear power. And if that were to happen, then many other regional powers, such as Egypt and Turkey, would also attempt to follow suit – a nuclear arms race in the world’s most unstable region.Prince Mohammed’s comments should serve as a warning to Mr Obama as he briefs other G7 leaders on the Iran talks at this week’s summit in Germany.From Saudi Arabia’s perspective, though, Prince Mohammed believes Riyadh has every right to be alarmed at the prospect of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, particularly in the light of its involvement in supporting the Houthis to overthrow Yemen’s government. “The Houthi rebels, backed by Iran, set about taking over Sanaa and then attempting to takeover Aden,” he said. “The reason air strikes became necessary was to reverse that advance and keep the road open for a political solution.“All the evidence supports the fact that Iran is using the Houthis as warring agents for them to transform Yemen into a springboard for the delusional hegemonic designs in the Arab world.”Yemeni separatists fight Houthi rebels (Photo: Saleh Al-Obeidi/AFP/Getty Images)
He played down suggestions that, equipped with its new military might, his country had its own plans for regional domination. “Saudi Arabia does not have the same ambitions for the region as others do,” he said in a reference to Iran. “All we care for is the preservation of our stability and security, and that of the Arab and Muslim worlds.”The ambassador also expressed his concern about suggestions that Britain was playing a less prominent role in world affairs. Last week Ashton Carter, the US defence secretary, warned against what he called Britain’s “disengagement” from world affairs in the wake of the recent defence cuts.Prince Mohammed warned that this could have negative repercussions, particularly in the Middle East. “The perception that Britain is withdrawing from the international stage could have a negative impact,” he said. “Britain has played a historical role in the region due to its colonial past. It knows the Arab world very well and it can still have a pivotal positive role. To see a country like Britain no longer playing a central role in the region will have ramifications that are not positive.”Read the whole story
· · · · · · · ·Potential Saudi Nuke Purchase From Pakistan Remains A Mystery
Daily Caller - Jan 23, 2016A picture taken in 1971 shows a nuclear explosion in Mururoa atoll. France said on March 24, 2009 it will compensate 150,000 victims of nuclear testing carried out in the 1960s in French Polynesia and Algeria, after decades of denying its responsibility.Seeking Pakistan nukes? Saudi Arabia says it will do whatever it takes to protect its security against Iran
ChristianToday - Jan 26, 2016Saudi Arabia Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir has shunned questions on whether the Kingdom was trying to purchase nuclear weapons from Pakistan, and instead warned of the threats posed by Iran after the latter regained billions of dollars worth of ...Saudi Foreign Minister refuses to answer question on acquiring nuclear weapons from Pakistan
The Independent - Jan 22, 2016Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister, Adel Al-Jubeir, has refused to answer questions about reports Riyadh was attempting to buy nuclear weapons from Pakistan, but said the Kingdom would do "whatever it takes" to protect itself. When asked about nuclear ...No Pakistan mediation between KSA and Iran
Arab News - Jan 24, 2016Friends !! what you see is not truth . don't go to statement . Saudia's always believe in Pakistani Forces help. because current world if you have ONE Islamic super power with atomic bomb , is Pakistan . thousand of saudi ,Bahrain , Qatar, UAE etc ...The Saudi conundrum
IBNLive (blog) - Jan 25, 2016The reports about securing a few nukes from Pakistan could be worrisome but these are unlikely to be true because the world's sanctions on Saudi Arabia and Pakistan would have to follow, which would be never in both the nations' interests. For India in ...Read the whole story
· ·
Potential Saudi Nuke Purchase From Pakistan Remains A Mystery
Daily Caller-Jan 23, 2016A picture taken in 1971 shows a nuclear explosion in Mururoa atoll. France said on March 24, 2009 it will compensate 150,000 victims of ...Next Page of StoriesLoading...Page 3Saudi Arabia is not known to have a nuclear weapons program. From an official and public standpoint, Saudi Arabia has been an opponent of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, having signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and is a member of the coalition of countries demanding a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the Middle East.[1][2] Studies of nuclear proliferation have not identified Saudi Arabia as a country of concern.[3]
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment