Iranian nukes? No worries
Writing in USA Today, Kenneth Waltz picks apart international concerns over Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities.
Although it is impossible to be certain of Iranian intentions, it is far more likely that if Iran desires nuclear weapons, it is for the purpose of enhancing its own security, not to improve its offensive capabilities. Iran could be intransigent when negotiating and defiant in the face of sanctions, but it still acts to secure its own preservation.
Ira Stoll of Commentary Magazine pens his response to Waltz’ arguments on Iran.
[T]here’s a double standard when it comes to the Israeli A-bomb and an Iranian one. Waltz writes that “by reducing imbalances in military power, new nuclear states generally produce more regional and international stability, not less.” But he blames Israel’s nukes for fueling instability.
Steven A. Cook talks to the Council on Foreign Relations about the Egyptian army’s recent move to shore up its own power.
Clearly the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is stepping outside the legal bounds to undermine a parliament that is dominated by both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafist al-Nour Party. Although this is obviously controversial, oddly it has not produced an explosion of demonstrations in opposition either among revolutionaries, liberals, leftists, labor, or even the Muslim Brotherhood, against whom it was clearly targeted.
- Times of Israel: PM condemns suspected ‘price tag’ attack on West Bank mosque
- Haaretz: Author of The Color Purple refuses to authorize Hebrew version because ‘Israel is guilty of apartheid’
- The Jerusalem Post: Israel unimpressed by Iran’s 20% enrichment offer
- Ynet: South under fire: 4 rockets fired at Ashkelon
- New York Times: Uncertainties Underlie the Celebrations in Cairo
- Washington Post: Obama presses Russia’s Putin on Syria violence
- Wall Street Journal: Sinai Attacks Show Risks in Israel