Why single out Iran? What about Israel?

The big issue: the nuclear threat

Sunday September 23, 2007
The Observer

In his careful analysis of what is and is not known about the reason for Operation Orchard, the Israelis' 6 September bombing raid into northern Syria, Peter Beaumont notes that the 'message being delivered from Tel Aviv is clear: if Syria's ally, Iran, comes close to acquiring a nuclear weapon, and the world fails to prevent it, either through diplomatic or military means, then Israel will stop it on its own'. ('Was Israeli raid a dry run for attack on Iran?' News, last week.)

Article continues

---

---

But if this can be explained away as a harbinger of Israel acting 'on its own' to 'stop' other states from 'acquiring a nuclear weapon', are other states then permitted to act on their own to cause damage to Israel's nuclear weapons programme and capability? How about to the United States's nuclear weapons programme and capability? And if not, why not?Does this right to engage in a breach of the peace under the United Nations charter apply to all states when nuclear weapon are at issue? Or only to some states on a highly selective basis?