A group of 30 progressive House Democrats sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday urging the Trump administration to both acknowledge and provide details on Israel’s undeclared nuclear program amid its participation in the Iran war.
It’s a surprising and strikingly bold idea. The U.S. government has never officially acknowledged the program, and Israel’s policy has been to neither confirm nor deny possession of a nuclear arsenal, instead relying on “nuclear ambiguity” as a strategic deterrent. If Washington acknowledged Israel has nuclear weapons, it would be a break from a long bipartisan tradition of the U.S. helping to provide cover for Israel’s policy.
Led by Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas, the Democrats’ proposed policy would improve the United States’ ability to make smart strategic decisions in the Middle East, claim more credibility as it tries to broker nuclear nonproliferation efforts, and help stabilize a region wracked by regional power competition. Simultaneously, it would be a tool for progressives to create more distance between the U.S. and Israel — by insisting that Washington stop treating it as a special exception to so many of its policies.
It is a matter of global safety for the international community to have a sense of Israel’s “red lines.”
While it has never been officially confirmed that Israel has nukes, such an arsenal is widely believed to exist by experts and nuclear weapon watchdogs, and it has been privately acknowledged by the U.S. intelligence community for decades. But there have been notable instances in which people in the know have appeared to let the truth slip. Former CIA Director Robert Gates described Israel as a nuclear power during his 2006 Senate confirmation hearings for secretary of defense. That same year, Israel’s then-prime minister, Ehud Olmert, described Israel as having nuclear weapons — a gaffe that led to calls for his resignation. And in 2023, Israel’s heritage minister suggested Israel drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza. (He was subsequently suspended from Cabinet meetings.)
“Israel’s arsenal is the worst-kept nuclear secret,” Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, told me over the phone. “There are a lot of questions about the size of the arsenal, the delivery systems, there are details that are not well established in the public domain. But Israel has nuclear weapons. The United States government knows it. The region knows it.”
Israel’s “open secret” nuclear status has carried distinct benefits. It has been a deterrent against adversaries and allowed Israel to implicitly threaten existential destruction against adversaries. At the same time, not declaring its arsenal has allowed the country to avoid the international scrutiny that comes with being a nuclear power — and to avoid international nuclear nonproliferation norms.
Castro and his colleagues want to change the U.S.’ unofficial policy of allowing Israel to maintain this unique position among the world’s nuclear powers. In their letter, the Democrats demanded that Congress be informed about the scope of Israel’s nuclear arsenal and capabilities, as well as its nuclear doctrine — the circumstances in which Israel’s government would or would not use its weapons. As the letter states, this is not an abstract concern, but a question with real stakes:
The risks of miscalculation, escalation, and nuclear use in this environment are not theoretical. American service members continue to be deployed throughout the region. Congress has a constitutional responsibility to be fully informed about the nuclear balance in the Middle East, the risk of escalation by any party to this conflict, and the administration’s planning and contingencies for such scenarios. We do not believe we have received that information.
The letter also notes that “a policy of official ambiguity about the nuclear capabilities of one party to this conflict makes coherent nonproliferation policy in the Middle East impossible.”
Avner Cohen, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told The Washington Post, which first reported on the letter, that the missive is “something that people did not dare do before” and that “even raising these questions publicly is a departure from a bipartisan norm.”
It’s remarkable that this ask has long been considered taboo — because the policy is such common sense.
It is a matter of global safety for the international community to have a sense of Israel’s “red lines” when it comes to using nuclear weapons, particularly given that it has been in armed conflict with several countries simultaneously for years, and it has carried out what many experts and human rights groups have considered a genocidal operation in Gaza.
Second, it would improve U.S. policymaking if its federal government could be candid about the balance of power in the Middle East. Acknowledging that Israel has nuclear weapons would allow lawmakers and federal bureaucrats to fully reckon with the reasons countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia pursue nuclear ambitions. That, in turn, could help inform how the U.S. negotiates with Iran over its nuclear program and address its concerns about regional security and power.
“When you’re having an honest discussion about drivers and asymmetries, I think you can design effective, more effective policies, and you can have more fruitful honest conversations,” Davenport said.
It also would make the U.S.’ position on nuclear nonproliferation look more credible if it embraces transparency and would apply pressure on Israel to adopt measures to reduce nuclear risk.
The Trump administration is unlikely to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear program, but it is a good policy to have up for discussion — and could plausibly be adopted by an administration (of either party) in the future. For progressive lawmakers and activists, it makes sense to demand acknowledgement of Israel’s nuclear program alongside calls to cut off military aid to Israel. The U.S. cannot solve the conflicts in the Middle East, but if it wants to play a role as a broker to help achieve stability in the region, it needs to operate more equitably and transparently.
Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He primarily writes about politics and foreign policy.