Right after I started a small newspaper, I received advice
from several individuals telling me that to guarantee immediate and long
lasting success; I should invite well known personalities to write for the
paper. A number of names were suggested, but I did not contact them to see if
they would be interested to join the team, or if they knew someone was
promoting them.
My purpose in starting the newspaper, and later this blog,
was and remains that I have a message I wish to put out now and leave behind
after I'm gone. I never thought it would succeed commercially, and never
pursued this angle because the important thing for me is not the reward I may
get from my work, but what the work will do to help improve the subjects I
choose to tackle.
Sadly, things have evolved in the democracies in such a way
that commercial success and intellectual honesty do not go together anymore
than you can mix water and oil. A choice between financial success and personal
integrity must often be made by almost everyone, and I made mine.
I am aware that in this day and age, many who wish to start
something new or perpetuate something old, hitch a ride on the coattails of
existing celebrities. This is why companies appoint them to sit as directors,
paying them good money even if they attend the board meetings but once a year,
if at all. It is why so-called think tanks attract those who could never think
an original idea, as well as those who tank every time they open the mouth to
say something. And the embarrassing list goes on.
An example of this trend can be seen in the article that
came under the title: “The growing threat of nuclear terrorism” and the
subtitle: “America and Russia must cooperate to thwart rogue state attacks,”
written by Moshe Kantor (who is president and founder of the International
Luxembourg Forum For Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe) and published on March 23,
2017 in The Washington Times.
Despite the fact that prominent and well respected names are
associated with that Forum, it promises nothing more valuable to the purpose
for which Kantor says he created it, than what you saw in the subtitle of his
article. In fact, what you'll read in the opening sentence is this: “the
nuclear threat from North Korea
and Iran ...”
And with this goes the promise that: “collaboration between the U.S. and Russia
[is] a major theme that will be discussed in Washington , D.C.
This is like promising a Club-Med caliber brainstorming tour
on a luxury cruise ship, but taking the clients on a rowboat across the lake
instead. Look what Kantor is saying, and try to find in his words anything that
goes beyond what was said thousands of times already … what proved to be as
useless as beating a dead horse. Here is a montage of his words, condensed for
the sake of brevity:
“China which has so far been reticent to condemn North
Korea, their economic and military ally … North Korea is taking liberties with
the international community and the UN Security Council has not been tough
enough … Trump has identified these sanctions as ineffectual … This is a
shameful demonstration of the impotence of the great powers and the Security
Council”.
This said about North Korea ,
Kantor switches to an attack on Iran :
“It is impossible to look at the global threat without
considering it in the context of the Iran deal … This deal is a catastrophic
mistake of historic proportions … The strict enforcement of the deal's
provisions must be high on the international community's agenda”.
And so Kantor recommends the following:
“Leaders of the world powers must make countering nuclear
terrorism the highest priority by upholding international security with
cooperation … collaboration between intelligence agencies and special
operations services will neutralize the risk of nuclear attacks”.
And this is all that Moshe Kantor has to say. It is what he
promises will be discussed when the Forum meets in Washington . But could the attendees do
better? The answer is yes; they could do better.
If they are serious, they can begin the discussion by
calling for the Middle East to be transformed
into a nuclear-free zone, thus serve as model for other zones to be so
transformed.
For this to work, however, Israel must come clean with its own
nuclear program if it has one. It must tell where it has been, and where it
stands now.