(Analysis) Argentina and Israel recently made a controversial decision at the United Nations, opposing a resolution calling for the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones, including in the Middle East.
By standing against the initiative, both countries signaled their belief that nuclear weapons remain crucial to ensuring Israel’s survival in a region besieged by hostile forces.
The resolution, supported by 172 countries, aimed to promote nuclear disarmament and create new nuclear-weapon-free zones around the world. Argentina and Israel were the only two nations to vote against, while three countries abstained.
This move underscores Argentina’s alignment with Israel’s stance on Middle East security issues, especially under the administration of President Javier Milei. Israel has long resisted efforts to create a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.
The country sees its (unofficial) nuclear capabilities as essential to its defense, especially given the ongoing threats from radical Islamist groups and Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which further underscores its determination to maintain a strategic advantage in the region.
Argentina’s decision to side with Israel marks a significant departure from its previous positions on nuclear disarmament. Historically, Argentina has supported nuclear non-proliferation and the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Both Argentina and Israel seem to recognize that nuclear weapons serve as a deterrent against aggressive forces in the Middle East. Radical Islamic groups continue to target Israel and other non-Muslim communities in the region, threatening their existence.
Nuclear Weapons as Shield: Argentina’s and Israel’s Attitudes to Middle East Security
However, the wider international community sees the creation of nuclear-weapon-free zones as essential to global peace and security. The UN resolution called for an expert study on existing and potential nuclear-free regions and stressed that such zones would strengthen non-proliferation efforts.
Despite this overwhelming support, Argentina’s vote suggests it shares Israel’s concerns about disarmament weakening its defense capabilities in a volatile region.
Christian organizations stress the importance of Israel’s survival for preserving their indigenous faith traditions in the region, citing concerns about the growing persecution of religious minorities in neighboring areas, including the Palestinian territories.
From Ideology to Atrocity: Understanding Hamas’ Religious War Against Israel
Argentina’s vote reflects a broader shift in its foreign policy under Miley. The administration has made clear its intention to support Israel and the United States on major international issues.
While the US supported the UN resolution on this occasion, Argentina’s alignment with Israel suggests that it prioritizes regional security concerns over broader disarmament goals.
In conclusion, Argentina and Israel’s opposition to the UN resolution signals their shared belief that nuclear weapons are essential to Israel’s defense against existential threats posed by radical Islamic forces.
This stance reflects a pragmatic approach to security in one of the world’s most volatile regions, where disarmament could leave Israel vulnerable to attack.
Nuclear Weapons as Shield: Argentina’s and Israel’s Attitudes to Middle East Security
