MORDECHAI Vanunu

[mcgillianaire]

I just finished watching one of the most awesome BBC documentaries of all-time. Thank you Supernova, you rock!! As the subject suggests, it was about the former Israeli nuclear technician who publicly exposed Israel's possession of nuclear weapons in 1986. What followed next could be likened to the stuff legends are made of. I recommend all-those unfamiliar or curious to grab a copy and watch it now, even if it's a year old. I had never heard of him before he got released earlier this year, and until watching this program didn't know too much about the whole deal. Pretty intsense shit. Anybody who's got Highspeed and a messaging program, lemme know, I'd love to send you my copy. It's about 150 Megs.

For those who have an opinion or several about the whole Vanunu controversy, speak out. And for those who don't, do you think someone is a traitor for revealing nuclear secrets or a hero(ine)? This should be fairly interesting if enough get involved. I shall reserve my own thoughts for the moment. Let the tongue loose!

Comments

Vanunu

[dubaiwalla.livejournal.com]

I think I've seen the documentary before, or most of it, at any rate. Vanunu's a hero, as far as I'm concerned.

I can see why Israel has developed a nuclear weapons program- it lives in a bad neighborhood, and its neighbors want it annihilated. I believe that the foundation of the state of Israel was illegal- but I don't think it is reasonable to call for its citizens to pack their bags up and leave either- or worse yet be killed by terrorists. And Israeli nukes are not being used senselessly against Arabs.

That having been said, if you allow the right to Israel to develop nukes, you must allow Iran and Iraq to do the same, at least, if they pull out of the NPT and suchlike. You could argue that an Israeli government is probably likely to be stable and responsible, and you would be right- but how does one translate this into a fair and quantifiable yardstick that you could use across the world? And why should Israel not be subject to international sanctions for its programs a la India and Pakistan? American legislation prevents the country from helping a country with a known nuclear weapons program, but Israel’s strategic ambiguity, so to speak, combined with Washington’s blind eye nets it $3 billion per annum.

Vanunu is a hero to me because:
1) He exposed Western hypocrisy because we can see the double standards in international law dealing with nukes (realpolitik is not nice).
2) I dislike state secrets in general. The people of the State of Israel have a right to know about what is being done in their name. Including the development of nuclear weapons, something that I’m sure sections of Israeli society would not be happy about.
3) ALthough I think Israel should keep its nuke program, I think it should also be subject to the same international pressures that India and Pakistan were/are subject to.

Needless to say, I’m not happy with either:
1) The way in which Vanunu was captured. You could make the case that he broke the law and deserved it. But I would say that if a state descends to the level of a law-breaker, then it loses the moral high ground… although the government of Israel has precious of that anyway, in my eyes.
2) The unreasonable restrictions he is subject to even now.

Re: Vanunu

[mcgillianaire.livejournal.com]

You've taken the words right out of my mouth. :)

There is also probably a fair argument in trying not to compare a nuclear-armed Israel with a nuclear-armed Iran or pre-Saddam Iraq. Having said that, and as you quite rightly mentioned, since Israel is nuclear-armed, it should be subject to the same international pressures experienced by India and Pakistan (or any other nuclear aspirant). Things are in such a sad state of affairs, nobody is even allowed or has been able to monitor and inspect Israel's WMD facilities since its inception. And the one time they did let in US agents, they were deceived and shown absolutely nothing. Ever since then, each American President has struck deals with the Israelis. That's really pathetic and dangerous - not in the sense of Israel using their weapons, but there have been a flood of substantial reports describing nuclear waste accidents, fires, leakages etc.

Vanunu broke the law and as such handed himself on a platter to those in higher places to teach him a lesson. Did he deserve to be punished? Yes, but the process of justice presented to him over the past 18 years has not really done much to present Israeli democracy, freedom and its justice system in a bright light. Vanunu, as far as I'm concerned, was treated the way any such enemy of the state, would have been treated in a dictatorship or singleparty police-state.

[smilingbuddha.livejournal.com]

sounds interesting.. i'd like a copy: AIM smi1ingbuddha (its a 1 not an L)

[mcgillianaire.livejournal.com]

Added you. Anytime you want the file send me a msg. I'm usually online 24/7 but not always near the computer but I'll keep the file ready. :)

[pappubahry.livejournal.com]

Traitor.

Comparing the nuclear arsenal of Israel (a country that has been under attack since around the day of its independence, and a country that is democratic and gives its citizens freedom) to that of dictatorships/near dictatorships (such as Iran) is wrong.

[dubaiwalla.livejournal.com]

Traitor
By exposing Israel's nuclear weapons program, has Vanunu made either Israel or the world a more dangerous place? I would imagine the contrary is true- you are less likely to attack a known nuclear state and set off a war. If I remember correctly, the documentary even raised questions about whether Israeli security deliberately let him work there, so that he would leak news of the program to the world. In most countries, such a leak would harm the country's international relations, with both its neighbors and the big powers. In Israel's case, this is not true.

I'd be rather interested in your general views on nuclear weapons in South Asia, and also whether by your above statement means that India has the right to develop nukes but Pakistan doesn't.

[pappubahry.livejournal.com]

If the choice is between hero and traitor, I think that betraying state secrets makes Vanunu a traitor. I'd say that it didn't make too much difference to the overall state of affairs, but it's the principle of the thing...

I hadn't thought about India-Pakistan in these terms before... Ideally neither would have nukes (in general I believe in the principle of security through MAD, but the more states you let in, the riskier it gets), but I would say that India has a greater right to have them than Pakistan.

Not that I'd lean too hard on Pakistan to disarm, were I some sort of international force. That would be too risky.