Opinion: It’s Time to Cease Nuclear Arms Race and Disarm

This column appeared previously in the Daily Hampshire Gazette.

You’d think we’d have learned from the Iraq war.  Among others, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged Congress to launch that war, asserting the U.S. “must destroy the [Iraq] regime” because of the risk of “a nuclear-armed Saddam.”  Thousands of lives and over a trillion dollars were wasted, allegedly to stop Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).  The weapons weren’t there, but that war’s repercussions continue. 

Trump, suddenly forgetting the Iraq disaster, reinforced Israel’s June 13 first-strike attack on Iran, allegedly to block Iran’s nuclear weapons development. On June 21, Trump announced his own bombing there, stating: “Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror.”   

In his recent column supporting Trump’s decision (“Twelve Day Iran War:  Why and what’s next,” Daily Hampshire Gazette, July 28), Richard Fein asserts Iran “has been developing … nuclear weapons.”  But as recently as March 2025, Trump’s National Intelligence director contradicted this assertion, stating the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and [its] Supreme leader … has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003,” an assessment The New York Times reported still held in June.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in  June, did not affirmatively find that Iran had diverted enriched uranium for weapons, but did raise noncompliance and violation concerns.  I agree nuclear proliferation is a serious concern, but regarding all countries, including Israel, not just Iran.

Iran’s a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) signatory, hasn’t been accused of actually having nuclear weapons, and its Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz sites were under IAEA inspections. 

In contrast, Israel hasn’t signed the NPT, its Dimona nuclear facility isn’t under IAEA inspections, and its suspected nuclear weapons  – an estimated 90 or more – have been widely reported, including in a declassified Kissinger/Nixon memo. 

The nuclear double-standard is obvious.  

The NPT offered this tradeoff for non-nuclear-weapons states:  forswear nuclear weapons (NPT Article II), in exchange for “the inalienable right” to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes (which would include peaceful nuclear enrichment) (Art. IV), and the nuclear weapons states’ pledge (Art. VI) “to pursue negotiations in good faith on … cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament … ”

Iran’s “nuclear enrichment capacity” is not prohibited by the NPT, if for peaceful purposes. Moreover, Obama’s JCPOA agreement with Iran allowed nuclear enrichment, limited to the 3.67% level needed for nuclear power plants. Unfortunately, Trump unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA, effectively killing that deal.

Fein argues Israel’s attack was self-defense because Iran has threatened Israel and has been developing nuclear weapons [if true].  This seems like a variant of Bush’s disastrous “Bush Doctrine” Iraq war justification, that an adversary seeking or possessing nuclear weapons is grounds for a preventative “self-defense” attack.  

Does that mean Iran could attack Israel’s Dimona nuclear facility, in “self-defense” because Israel has developed nuclear weapons and threatened Iran?  Surely, we can’t endorse such a dangerous doctrine.

Concerning preemptive self-defense, better to review criteria from the widely cited 1837 “Caroline” case for when that might be justified, for example, when an adversary’s attack is “imminent” and there’s no peaceful alternative to defuse it.

Here, peaceful diplomatic alternatives were undermined.  First by Trump leaving the JCPOA, second by Israel, attacking the day before more scheduled U.S.-Iranian negotiations.  Given no showing, or even claim, that Iran actually has a nuclear weapon, an Iranian nuclear attack wasn’t imminent.  So, the Israeli-American attacks wouldn’t meet Caroline criteria for valid self-defense.

As for nuclear threats posed by a “state sponsor of terror,” Trump may worry about Iran, but we should also worry about Israel.

Fein acknowledges that “Netanyahu is carrying out a genocidal war against the Palestinians.”  I and many others agree. Israel’s bombardments have killed thousands of civilians and made the streets of Gaza resemble Hiroshima.  Leaders holding nuclear triggers, and a failing moral compass, should terrify everyone.

We need broader diplomatic steps towards nuclear disarmament, like the proposed treaty for a Middle East WMD-free zone.  In or out of the NPT, it’s time to live up to its Article VI goaI:  Cease the nuclear arms race and disarm.  

Rudy Perkins of Amherst took part in an interfaith peace delegation to Iran led by an American rabbi in 2008, getting to speak with Muslim, Jewish, and Christian religious leaders there, and visiting historic Isfahan, Tehran, and other Iranian cities.