TheGaggle
Politics • Culture • News
Our community is made up of those who value the freedom of speech, the right to debate and the promise of open, honest conversations.

We don't agree on everything but we never silence our followers and value every opinion on our channel.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
The Gaggle Book Club: "Israel and the Bomb," by Avner Cohen

Each week, the Gaggle Book Club recommends a book for Gagglers to read and—most important—uploads a pdf version of it.

Our practice is that we do not vouch for the reliability or accuracy of any book we recommend. Still less, do we necessarily agree with a recommended book's central arguments. However, any book we recommend will be of undoubted interest and intellectual importance.

Today's book club selection is "Israel and the Bomb," by Avner Cohen. Published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Cohen's book is a detailed history of one of the best-kept--or maybe worst-kept--secrets in history: Israel's possession of a formidable nuclear arsenal.

Israeli scholar Avner Cohen's book traces the development of Israel’s nuclear program from the late 1940s through to 1970, covering key political decisions, technological advances and international diplomacy.

Cohen argues that Israel’s nuclear ambitions began immediately after the state's creation, driven by Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s belief that nuclear weapons were essential for Israel’s survival. A key figure in this project was noted "Israeli dove" Shimon Peres, who played a critical role in securing French support for Israel’s nuclear program.

Cohen provides evidence that it was France that was Israel’s key nuclear patron, particularly in the wake of the 1956 Suez Crisis, when Israel collaborated with France and Britain in a military attack on Egypt, led at the time by by President Gamal Abdel Nasser. In 1957, France agreed to help Israel build a nuclear reactor at Dimona. The reactor's ostensible purpose was peaceful, but few doubted that the ultimate goal was to ensure that Israel would be able to produce its own nuclear weapons. France had a change of heart in 1962, under President Charles de Gaulle, and stopped their cooperation with Israel. But by then it was too late.

Cohen highlights the Kennedy administration’s attempts to inspect Dimona in the early 1960s. Israel, under Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, responded with deception tactics, allowing only superficial inspections and withholding key information. The Johnson administration took a more lenient approach, happily playing along with Israel’s now you see it/now you don't policy of nuclear ambiguity.

Cohen claims that Israel and the U.S. reached a secret understanding under President Nixon, allowing Israel to maintain nuclear weapons as long as it did not test them or declare itself publicly to be a nuclear power. This agreement institutionalized Israel’s policy of ambiguity, which remains in place to this day.

Why did this happen? Why did the United States abandon its publicly-stated nuclear non-proliferation goals when it came to Israel? According to Cohen, the United States had, by the late 1960s, come to see Israel as an important strategic ally in the Middle East. U.S. policymakers, particularly under Johnson and Nixon, preoccupied as they were with keeping the Soviet Union out of the Middle East, viewed Israel as a bulwark against Soviet encroachments in the region. Israel's triumph in the 1967 Six-Day War confirmed Israel’s formidable military prowess, and helped reinforce U.S. interest in deepening security cooperation with this newly-emerging regional superpower. There was correspondingly diminishing interest in confronting Israel over nuclear issues.

By the late 1960s, also, the pro-Israel lobby was becoming stronger in the U.S., making it politically costly for any administration to confront Israel over its nuclear ambitions. Key political figures in Congress were increasingly sympathetic to Israel’s alleged security concerns, reinforcing the idea that pressuring Israel on nuclear issues was not worth the political cost.

U.S. policymakers told themselves that an Israeli bomb was less destabilizing than a nuclear arms race involving Arab states. In any case, the policymakers reasoned, Arab states lacked the technological and financial capability to develop their own nuclear weapons in response to Israel’s. Washington also comforted itself with the belief that Israeli nuclear ambiguity would deter large-scale regional wars, as Arab states would hesitate to risk a conflict with an implicitly nuclear-armed Israel.

"Israel and the Bomb" remains one of the most important works on Israel’s nuclear history. While Cohen faced significant challenges due to Israel’s secrecy, his reliance on U.S. archives provided crucial insights into the diplomatic history of Israel’s nuclear program.

Cohen,_Avner_-_Israel_and_the_Bomb_(2005,_Columbia_University_Press)_-_libgen.li.pdf
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
TG 2088: U.S.-Israel War On Iran Day 16: Asymmetric War Gets Evermore Asymmetric

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss Day 16 of the U.S.-Israel War On Iran, and conclude that, while the United States has gone through plans A, B and C, Iran has so far stuck to its strategy of inflicting as much pain as possible on its adversaries.

01:20:22
TG 2087: U.S.-Israel War On Iran Day 14: Is There Any Way To Get Out Of This Mess?

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle examine how the war that the United States and Israel launched against Iran 13 days ago is going, and wonder whether there is any way it can end without escalating into a world war.

01:31:47
International Committee To Defend Slobodan Milošević

This is the news conference from Belgrade, March 10, 2026. Unfortunately, almost all of it, with the exception of George Szamuely's contribution, is in Serbian.

01:56:42
The Putin-Clinton Conversations

Vladimir Putin and Bill Clinton discussed removing Slobodan Milošević from power 20 years ago. This is a sad read. Putin did as little to help Milošević (the man who withstood 11 weeks of NATO bombing) as he did 14 years later Viktor Yanukovych.

https://amp.meduza.io/en/feature/2020/10/08/the-regime-changers

Monday Night At The Movies

Please choose which one of the following 8 movies you would like to have screened next Monday, March 9.

The theme is "Coups and Military Dictatorships."

Please continue to vote after March 9, so that we can determine the runner-up. The runner-up will be screened on March 16.

This is absolutely insane:

Prior to the Iran war, US oil companies were generating ~$62 billion in annual free cash flow with oil prices at $55/barrel.

Now, with oil prices at $100/barrel, US oil companies are expected to generate $163 billion in annual free cash flow, if current prices are sustained.

In other words, US oil giants are set to rake in an additional +$100 BILLION in free cash flow per year if oil prices remain elevated.

We are arguably witnessing the most profitable market conditions in history for US big oil. https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2032977830234214487?s=20

January 21, 2023
More Leftie Than Thou
"Jacobin" Magazine Celebrates A Strike Against Ol' Blue Eyes

Here at "The Gaggle" we have very little time for the "more Leftie than thou" school of thought--that's the approach to life according to which the only thing that matters is whether you take the right position on every issue under the sun from Abortion to Zelensky. No one in the world meets the exacting standards of this school of thought; any Leftie leader anywhere is always selling out to the bankers and the capitalists. The perfect exemplar of this is the unreadable Jacobin magazine. 

The other day I came across this article from 2021. It's a celebration of trade union power. And not simply trade union power, but the use of trade union power to secure political goals. Of course (and this is always the case with the "more Leftie than thou" crowd), this glorious, never-to-be-forgotten moment on the history of organized labor took place many years ago--in the summer of 1974 to be exact. Yes, almost half a century has gone by since that thrilling moment when the working-class movement of Australia mobilized and prepared to seize the means of production, distribution and exchange. 

Well, not quite. Organized labor went into action against...Ol' Blue Eyes, the Chairman of the Board, the Voice; yes, Frank Sinatra. Why? What had Sinatra done? Sinatra was certainly very rich, and he owned a variety of properties and businesses. But if the Australian trade union movement were, understandably, searching for the bright, incandescent spark that would finally awaken the working class from its slumber there were surely richer, greedier, more dishonest, more decadent, above all more Australian individuals it could have discovered. Australia was never short of them. Rupert Murdoch immediately springs to mind. Why Sinatra?

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals