Honorable Susan Collins
United States Senate
413 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510
RE: Troubling times in the Middle East
Dear Susan,
I've written to you many times in the past, and have never been disappointed in the results. I have always expressed and continue to appreciate your service as Senator from the State of Maine, a service only favorably comparable to Maine's Margaret Chase Smith. Mainers are fortunate to have a Senator to whom we can write, and for whom we have the strongest belief our interests as well as the interests of the state, the nation and the world are all closest to her heart.
The reasons for my writing you in this public way are twofold.
First, I want to introduce you, your staff and through you, your colleagues in the Senate to Thomas Paine's Corner and to its esteemed editor Jason Miller. Jason's efforts have built a wonderful Internet site everyone in government should become familiar with. Welcome.
I cannot give Thomas Paine's Corner a strong enough endorsement. It stands atop a more noble and growing tradition of Internet involvement addressing problems, suggesting and finding solutions. Thomas Paine's Corner is fast closing in on a million unique and influential visitors from around the world, and from virtually every country that has Internet access.
Thomas Paine's Corner would welcome articles written by any and all members of Congress or their staff interested in reaching others who are similarly concerned for the future. Such an effort would reduce considerably the problem of answering and re-answering many questions that come to government. Thomas Paine's Corner articles are maintained in archives and available over the Internet after they are published. This and other important public resources on the Internet should be used for better communications by all public officials.
I'll leave it to you how to use Thomas Paine's Corner.
Second, I want to express my concern to you as the current ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, as well a member of the Committee on Armed Services with the subcommittee assignment of Emerging Threats and Capabilities.
I write concerning Israel's nuclear weapons, her conduct in the Middle East, and, my country's continued financial support for Israel through our foreign policy budget as well as in legislation. I also want to address briefly some common misperceptions about the ongoing conflict in Iraq.
The titles you hold in the Senate are ominous enough, though they are easily matched by the responsibilities they entail and, the times in which we live. Protecting the nation and both measuring and meeting potential threats brought against our country and the world are no easy tasks today.
Innovation and bold steps are required to keep the world from sinking deeper in melee.
Israel is of particular concern to me because, Israel is an ally of the U.S. Israel's interests in a continuing expansion into and, a military presence in lands outside that which she claimed when Israel seceded from the Arab nation from which she wrested the Jewish state in 1948, are not in the interest of either the U.S. or, in the interest of world peace.
Israel has slowly but surely developed policies that make her an exclusionary state based upon religion necessitating ethnic cleansing regardless of the unfavorable light with which that phrase paints her. The Palestinian issue seems intractable, and given the history of it, the only real resolution will have to come from Israel's own efforts and the concessions she must make to be accepted by the neighbors chosen by the Zionist movement.
In this light, like that of the majority of American Jews for whom I cannot speak but only intimate, I grow tired of the reluctance of Israel here.
As you know the war in Iraq is not going well, and this blunder is in no small part exacerbated by a perception and perhaps the reality that U.S. interests are closely aligned to Israeli interests that are in clear contravention of U.N. resolution after U.N. resolution. The path Israel has chosen paints both Israel and the U.S. in an unfortunate light.
The recent open admission by the acting Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert concerning Israeli possession of nuclear weapons is more than an embarrassment. It is a shame for which no end should ever be anticipated as long as she continues to possess nuclear weapons. Israel has no deterrent-need of nuclear weapons, and by her possession of nuclear weapons, she impels a perceived deterrent need against her.
With so many U.S. troops in the Middle East Israel's nuclear weapons are a clear and present danger to our troops, U.S. interests in the Middle East as well as every country in the region. Again, currently Israel has no need of nuclear weapons for deterrence.
Israel's nuclear weapons are therefore offensive weapons, even if it can be argued these nuclear weapons are merely used to bully. It is an outrage because it is an ongoing impetus for other nations throughout the region and the world to look to acquire nuclear weaponry for both deterrent use and offensive capability in our increasingly nuclear-unstable world.
UN Security Resolution 687, passed in 1991, demanded Iraqi disarmament. This resolution established a precept of "establishing in the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction."
Thomas R. Pickering, then U.S. Ambassador to The U.N., both proposed and voted for this resolution in 1991, making the U.S. a signatory. He did this despite sure U.S. intelligence knowledge about Israeli nuclear armament in 1991, an arsenal for which Israel had no deterrent need, nor any need as long as she remains under the protective covenant of a strong relationship with the U.S.
The G.W. Bush administration originally alleged violations of Resolution 687 to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It is an invasion and an intrusion upon the sovereignty of Iraq that has gone badly and has every appearance of destroying Iraq as a sovereign nation capable of standing without a disastrous U.S. military presence that has now gone on for four-plus years. I for one find the described scenario preposterous, given that no WMDs were found.
Any description of what U.S. troops are now doing in Iraq that involves "fighting the war on terrorism" is similarly outrageously preposterous.
And further, any assertion the U.S. must remain to quell sectarian violence and the Iraqi civil war, borders on sheer lunacy. Just try and imagine the American Civil War had a foreign nation invaded the U.S. to quell the violence between the states.
The idea now being fostered by this Administration that Iraq cannot govern itself without U.S. military personnel bristling with armed force on every street corner makes absolutely no sense. We are right now watching as almost daily U.S. helicopters are being shot out of the skies of Iraq. Why?
Was this the situation before the invasion? No. I leave it to you and your colleagues to discern what has changed to make the situation in Iraq so disastrous for the Iraqis and for the U.S. military stationed there. And, to begin to make amends to the Iraqi and the American people by forcing the hand of the President, and, making it impossible for any further continuance of any of these unsubstantiated contrivances.
Our country must move forward from this disaster, and the malevolence of a perception of sinister leadership being made by the Bush Administration. It is now known, there was no need to disarm Iraq. There was no need for the invasion. And, there is no need for any continued presence in Iraq. Assertions about the danger of wider wars are an invitation to making again the same mistakes we have been making all along in Iraq. Military intervention simply was not required.
There is a need for continued U.S. financial support for the reconstruction of a country we are responsible for destroying.
It now also has been publicly acknowledged that nuclear arms are in the Middle East in the hands of the Israelis, our ally. Thus, it seems clear both for U.S. interests in the region and in the interest of world peace, if it is possible, we must disarm Israel of its nuclear weapons. The U.S. should proceed immediately upon that course.
The benefit to U.S. interests that align well with promoting world peace and security would be enough to justify any action toward that end, as we saw in Iraq. Open hostilities with Israel would seem out of the question. It also seems this end could be realized by withdrawing U.S. aid from Israel contingent upon her signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and, allowing IAEA inspectors in to oversee and ensure Israel has dismantled and destroyed all her nuclear weaponry.
Short of this course, the U.S. has not moral standing to ask any other nation on earth to not look toward nuclear armament. Short of this course, the U.S. legitimizes nuclear armament of virtually any and every nation.
Maintaining nuclear arsenals by any country is immoral. Due to the destructive nature of these weapons as well as the lingering danger their use imposes upon the future, this is a given. These weapons are being bequeathed again to the future of the world. It is a horrid legacy of ignorance we should not repeat.
However, in the complex atmosphere of deterrence justifications so long extolled by the U.S. it is difficult to ask any country to dismantle its nuclear arsenal. Israel however, is an exception. There is no nuclear-armed country for which Israel requires a nuclear deterrent. In fact, there are concerns Iran is currently seeking a nuclear deterrent for the nuclear arms Israel possesses.
As you recently returned from Israel, I ask you. Are Israel's nuclear weapons something anyone should want to bequeath to the children of the Israelis? And should the Iranians be similarly disposed because of Israel's nuclear weapons? The answers here are no, and no.
As such, I am asking you to work with your colleagues toward the end of removing Israel's nuclear weapons from the Middle East. It will not be an easily made argument, but I believe it is the only sane argument given the current dynamics of world affairs. Non-deterrent nuclear weapons must be dismantled as the first step.
I am obviously unaware of the intricate workings of the personalities and personal politics in Washington D.C. However, I have noted in the past you have been able to reach across the isle to Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.
You might on my behalf, and on behalf of the world, breach this subject with Senator Lieberman and others in the Senate. There is a rising tide of anti-Israel sentiment in the U.S. and around the world. There is an unfortunate rising tide of anti-semitism too, something I do not share. Despite my immense displeasure with Israel in her failed and misguided efforts, I have continued to hold my belief there are no bad people in the world, only misguided governments and groups. The least of which is not our own government and some groups in the U.S. that preach hatred of other people.
There are anti-semitics who visit Thomas Paine's Corner, but they do not represent the majority interest here. However, any failure to address this issue will only continue to foster their assertions being widely made that U.S. foreign policy is shackled to Israeli interests, interests which are not wholly legitimate.
Such a bipartisan effort as you, Senator Joe Lieberman and others could bring to the fore would surely change the dynamics of these issues for the better on all fronts.
The benefits over the long term would be immense for the world. It could be the first crucial step toward disarming all the nuclear weapons arsenals around the world. It also seems the only logical first step towards securing Middle East peace. Any failure to take up this issue would clearly invite a further nuclear proliferation misery for the entire world to come.
Thomas Paine's Corner is a publicly read forum. As one author among many more notable authors here, through my minor standing and, as a Mainer, I would encourage you and, through you, your colleagues in the Senate to address the readership on these issues here. Of all the web media outlets, Thomas Paine's Corner perhaps best illustrates the positive potential for dialogue in a democracy.
As always, while I hold certain views that may or may not be your views, the difference is not enough to sway me from my support of your work in the Senate, Senator Susan Collins.
Thank you for your work there, for your time and for considering my invitation to Thomas Paine's Corner. The country is in need of some answers and more of your excellent leadership skills.
As Maine goes, we can only hope, so may also go the nation, and the world.
My warmest regards,
Don Robertson, The American Philosopher
Limestone, Maine
--------------------------------------------------------
