Nuclear weapons love silence: how do the atomic bomb those who do not need a show

Under the noise of talk that Ukraine needs to create nuclear weapons to solve all its problems, political scientist Vladimir Fesenko proposes to remember how Israel did. They did not spend time on unnecessary conversations, and eventually forced to fear themselves all the enemies-neighborhoods. Once again, there was an outbreak of emotional conversations about nuclear weapons. The reason for this is known. But I am interested in quite another.

In my memory, rhetorical nuclear fever takes place regularly, already in a "dozen" once, since the 1990s. The content of these conversations is quite primitive: how bad we have given up nuclear weapons, and how well it would be We have received nuclear weapons. All this "nuclear energy" eventually goes into the air (now-into the air of social networks) without any political consequences. And it is clear why.

Because we have forced us to give up nuclear weapons, and now our American friends are categorically opposed that Ukraine becomes a nuclear state. I do not evaluate this in no way, I just remind. In the context of stormy discussions about nuclear weapons, I will tell one instructive history - about Israel and nuclear weapons. She with a certain irony is mentioned in her memoirs by the prominent Israeli politician and statesman Shimon Perez, who is considered the father of the Israeli atomic bomb.

In the late 1950s-early 1960s, Israel began to build his nuclear reactor. And this immediately caused rumors and suspicions that Israel is developing its nuclear weapons. Shimon Perez was involved in this project. In 1963, he came to the United States to enter into an agreement with the US government to buy airway missiles. Suddenly, he is unexpectedly invited to the White House, and there, contrary to the protocol, is found by US President John Kennedy.

The purpose of the meeting is extremely simple. Kennedy asked Perez directly: "What are your intentions if they relate to nuclear weapons?" Perez's response has made history: "Mr. President, I can tell you clearly and clearly that we will not install nuclear weapons in this region first. " In my opinion, such an answer was a manifestation of higher level of diplomatic art. Perez and did not confirm, and did not deny the work of Israel on nuclear weapons. Kennedy was quite satisfied with this answer.

But in Israel he ended in front of a crushing shaft of severe criticism for an unauthorized political statement. However, over time, quite quickly, this improvisation of Shimon Perez has become an official and long -term political position of Israel. It was called "nuclear ambiguity" - not to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons of Israel. This policy has become a sufficiently effective tool for containment from the attack on Israel.

After 1973, there were no interstate wars of Arab countries with Israel. Although conflict confrontation with the Palestinians is still ongoing. And it should be understood that the presence of nuclear weapons does not guarantee from the risks of conventional wars and conflicts, which confirms, in particular, the long -standing confrontation between India and Pakistan (both countries have nuclear weapons).

The morality of this fable is this: if you want to get nuclear weapons, then do not talk about it everywhere, but do so that neither friends nor enemies know about it. And even if you have these weapons, you do not have to report it all over the world. It is better to use the "nuclear uncertainty" formula. But do not perceive the nucleus as a safety panacea. But before you make nuclear weapons, finally do at least durable production. Start with small and most necessary.