Excuse me but there are major logic problems with your theory.
Egypt's air force was destroyed on the first day of the war. And it was losing the war in the Sinai. Thus it did not have the means to hit Israel's nuclear site(s). Now the USSR which was backing Egypt (with conventional arms only) did. Of course, this would mean direct Soviet intervention in the war. And if Israel were worried about that, that would cause Israel to be even more dependent on alliance with the US. Because the US is the only country which could be a restraining influence on the USSR. Israel would not want to keep the threat of Soviet involvement secret from the US - they would want the US to know. Because logic tells you the US is unlikely to have stood by and watched while the Soviet Union won a major Cold War victory with the Middle East falling into Soviet hands. Not something the US would have stood by and allowed to happen during the Cold War. So much for that motive.
I would note that throughout the long Cold War, the USSR never supplied nukes to any of its allies. Even in the case of Cuba where they installed nuclear missiles, those remained under direct Soviet control. We are very lucky they were cautious in this regard.
So the idea that the USSR would turn over nuclear weapons to Egypt isn't credible. And it isn't credible to think that Israel would want to keep the threat of Soviet direct nuclear involvement secret from the US.
Lastly, about your sentence: Remember, Israel was setting their sights on the Suez peninsula and lands beyond for economic, strategic (the canal), historical, religious and cultural reasons - it should be recalled that Israel's Menachem Begin gave back the Sinai to Egypt in exchange for a peace treaty. The value of the Sinai to Israel was and is clearly strategic. Strategic in that it supplied strategic depth - it was a space between Egypt's army and Israel's border. The historical, religious, and cultural reasons - and the canal - proved not important. |
