James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Combating the spread of weapons of mass destruction with training & analysis

Israel's Nuclear Policies and a NWFZ in the Middle East:
How Feasible Is It?

Report by Edith Bursac, Research Associate, International Organizations and Nonproliferation Program (IONP), CNS

Dr. Zeev Maoz, esteemed professor of Political Science and director of the International Relations Program at the University of California, Davis, and former head of the Harold Hartog Graduate School of Government and Policy at Tel Aviv University and the Jaffee Center for Strategies Studies, addressed faculty members, students, and staff in Monterey during a seminar sponsored by the Center for Nonproliferation Studies and the Monterey Institute of International Studies on 15 September 2006. During his presentation, Dr. Maoz offered insightful perspectives on Israel's nuclear policy and discussed ways in which a nuclear weapons free zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East might be accomplished. His talk was based on his recently published book, "Defending the Holy Land: A Critical Analysis of Israel's Security and Foreign Policy." For more information on Dr. Maoz and his publications visit his webpage at http://psfaculty.ucdavis.edu/zmaoz/.

Effectiveness of Israel's Security Policy

According to Dr. Maoz, Israel's policy with regards to nuclear weapons, contrary to conventional wisdom, has not accomplished any of the objectives envisaged by Israel's policy makers. These objectives included: preventing a comprehensive Arab attack against Israel; modifying the military objectives of its opponents; and promoting an Arab-Israeli peace settlement. In this regard, Dr. Maoz noted that nuclear weapons have not had a significant effect on the strategic and political realities in the Middle East, as demonstrated by the recent conflict between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. He downplayed the value of nuclear weapons by arguing that "nuclear weapons at best don't change anything and there is no historical evidence that nuclear weapons deterred Arab states from launching an attack against Israel." Not discounting the fact that other regional powers felt fundamentally threatened by Israel's nuclear arsenal, Dr. Maoz emphasized that nuclear weapons did not prevent low intensity conflicts and terrorist attacks, and have actually led to a non-conventional arms race in the region. He also stressed that there was no evidence that Israel's nuclear weapons program has contributed to bringing the Arab states to the negotiating table, nor did the arsenal play a role in the Arab calculus between war and peace.

Referring to the article "Back to the Future" written in the early 1990s by scholar and neorealist John Mearsheimer, Dr. Maoz contended that the possession of nuclear weapons by competing interests in a region could allow for some degree of stability; however, this potential was absent while Israel continues to have a monopoly on nuclear weapons. According to Mearsheimer's theory, the disintegration of the Soviet Union led to the collapse of a bipolar international system which in turn caused widespread instability. Based on Mearsheimer's assumption that nuclear weapons encourage rational behavior among competing nuclear powers and thereby reduce the risk of a major conflict, Maoz explored the on-going tensions in South Asia, noting that "the war in Kashmir did not escalate because both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers and are therefore hesitant to start a conflict under these circumstances." Applying this theory to the Middle East, Dr. Maoz said that "if Iran is indeed developing a nuclear weapons program, then the Middle East may actually stabilize by creating a bipolar system of power." According to this interpretation of the role of nuclear weapons in regional conflicts, such weapons would not only reduce the risks of regional instability but may actually increase stability in the Middle East. However, the realities of the Middle East over the last five decades suggest that "we don't know what happens if there is a nuclear balance in the region but before it reaches this point, instability may well increase to a point of a regional conflagration. Thus, the nuclear arms race in the Middle East could lead to war before it has a chance to stabilize within a MAD-like structure."

Motivations for WMD Developments in the Middle East

Dr. Maoz looked at the rationale behind why some states in the Middle East believe that they would be better off with nuclear weapons than without them. In order to gain a better understanding of the basic dynamics dominating the security objectives of states in the region--and in particular Israel's perceived need for a nuclear deterrent--Professor Maoz addressed several factors that may lead countries to develop a nuclear weapons capability. Some countries in the region view nuclear weapons as an insurance policy; for instance, Israel's security doctrine emerged from the assumption that its Arab neighbors were intent on destroying the Jewish state. Nuclear weapons, therefore, can serve as a counter-measure to serious national security threats. Additionally, a nuclear weapons program and related-technology involved, increases a state's power status in the region.

Israel's nuclear doctrine constitutes a powerful element in its domestic policy and will therefore be difficult to eliminate. With regard to the possibility of a conventional arms race in the region, Maoz warned that "the notion that nuclear weapons can create an arms race is one of the reasons to be concerned about developing nuclear weapons." He further emphasized that Israel's nuclear weapons program has led other states to develop the "poor man's WMD"--that is chemical, biological and radiological weapons--as a counterbalance against Israel.

Creating Incentives for Denuclearization:

Arguing that Israel's current security policy has not led to peace within the region, Dr. Maoz called for alternative strategies to manage conflict in the Middle East. He concluded with a series of recommendations for reform and reminded the audience of various fundamental steps that the United States in general and states in the Middle East can take as a means to reducing threat perceptions in the region.

In addressing the possibility of a NWFZ in the Middle East, Dr. Maoz emphasized that the United States "can play a crucial role in helping bring about a NWFZ in the Middle East by playing an equitable part in the process." Highlighting the fundamental mistrust and hostility among states in the region, Dr. Maoz reiterated the critical importance of reducing threat perceptions and pointed to the need for a gradual threat reduction process through confidence and security building measures. This method would reduce tensions and threat perceptions, as well as enable states to gain confidence and trust without the need for fundamental security concessions. He further emphasized that Israel could support a NWFZ in the Middle East provided that a comprehensive peace agreement can be achieved, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was resolved, and the Arab League followed up on the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. Dr. Maoz also called for the need to establish regional inspection and security regimes, and stressed that conventional arms control should be an element in the overall regional security architecture of the Middle East.