Egypt Must Reclaim Non-Aligned Legacy

See video
Rick Rozoff
September 27, 2012


Egypt Must Reclaim Non-Aligned Legacy
by grtv

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has warned Israel over its saber-rattling against Iran and the obstructionism of Tel Aviv which is preventing the realization of a nuclear-free Middle East.

The Middle East "no longer tolerates" any country's refusal to join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), "especially if this is coupled with irresponsible policies or arbitrary threats," Morsi said in his address at the 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Wednesday.

The Egyptian leader was referring to Israel’s policy of ambiguity about its military nuclear activities, which has helped it procure the Mideast’s only nuclear arsenal.

Press TV has interviewed Mr. Rick Rozoff, Chicago-based correspondent for the Centre for Research on Globalization, about the issue. What follows is an approximate transcript of the interview.

Press TV: I wanted to ask you, firstly, how you assess the relationship between Egypt and Israel especially since the fall of Mubarak and especially with this recent speech of President Morsi?

Rozoff: Yes, the speech today before the General Assembly in the United Nations by newly-elected President Morsi appears to signal a significant shift in the Egyptian position not only vis-à-vis Israel, but I would say in terms of intervening actively against threats by the United States, Israel and its allies - verbal at this point - perhaps more in the future against Iran and other neighboring countries.

Considering the significance of Egypt in the Arab world and having the largest population that this is a very meaningful transition apparently and one that I hope President Morsi and his government continue with.

Press TV: How does that equal then with Morsi’s government essentially saying that they will keep the “peace treaty” with Israel alive?

Rozoff: Well, that’s not the only impediment to Egypt realizing really its legacy - one that went back to Nasser of course as being an independent Non-Aligned Country and that hopefully Egypt will reassert itself in that capacity, but it means, first of all, seriously reexamining the Camp David Accords and everything that has followed, everything has followed rather.

But it also means the military client state relationship it has with the United States, the fact that it remains a major member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) partnership program called the Mediterranean Dialogue, to continue along the path of genuine non-alignment and de-militarization of the region and ultimately all over the world, Egypt would have to sever its close military ties with the United States in order to have to withdraw from the NATO Mediterranean Dialogue program.

Press TV: How significant is Morsi’s call for Israel to join the NPT and on that topic of nuclear non-proliferation also about the fact that every nation has the right to peaceful nuclear energy?

Rozoff: That’s a very good combination of requests, or of demands. First of all, it is inexcusable that Israel has remained a non-signatory nation to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) for half a century practically.

And it’s this sort of rogue activity of Israel and its major sponsor of course the United States; the ‘law of the jungle’ is an expression that Egypt’s Morsi used and that’s not an inaccurate one, that is the largest beast who feels it can operate with impunity, you know, summarily violates international law and Israel is certainly doing so on the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty.

That’s a legitimate demand that should be taken up seriously by the [UN] General Assembly and it should be introduced into the Security Council.


2012 / 09 / 28
Mike Corbeil says:

I agree with everything Rick Rozoff said, but, and while I'm presently referring to the "approximate transcript of the interview", the last paragraph is a heart-stopper. As far as I'm aware, the UNGA has often come to good votes, but the UNSC seems to rather constantly act against these votes. And, speaking of only the SC, even if every member state, except for one, and we all know which one that would be, voted to demand that Israel abide by and become co-signer of the nuclear NPT, there's one state that wouldn't. The USA would again place a veto, and the SC would again allow the criminally placed veto to have the power and legitimacy of a truly honest and legal veto. After all, Washington's vetos can't be legal, since they're criminal, the sort of thing only gangsters and hegemons would do. How can that be legal within the framework of international law? Tell me it can't be.

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Related videos

Our newsletter