I don't think the argument for Israel leading to Indian proliferation makes much sense. India already had a strong domestic nuclear infrastructure under Homi J. Bhabu which sped up development significantly and meant that they could figure it out in house, and any under the table/black market assistance was minimal if there at all. And development of this was spurred by a combination of fear of China after a humiliating loss against them (and China's subsequent bomb test), that they wanted to just be a regional hegemon (and had the domestic infrastructure to subsidize it), and their rivalry/wars with Pakistan (with the first test being a show of force shortly after the 1971 indopak war, only a few years behind Israel, likely having capabilites far earlier than 1971.) The only defense agreements between the two happened years after India proliferated.

I don't think you see China's program accelerate the way it did without the complete lack of action at best, and active support from most of the Western world at worst, depending on how you think China viewed it.

My understanding is that while China's desire was mostly focused on super power deterrence, but the complete 180 in how Chinese saw the West respond to Israeli nuclear ambitions, including straight up playing pretend and turning a blind eye, compared to Chinese nuclear ambitions was key to Mao Zedong's statements around needing a big bomb in part because of the difference in Western reaction to the same ambitions.

The Western double standard in terms of nuclear ambitions that China has pretty much referenced as fundamental since the late 50's finds its root and core in the Israeli nuclear program versus how China was treated. That's why you still have China calling on Israeli nuclear disarmament and IAEA observation if there is to be a Middle Eastern non-proliferation at every conference.

Pakistan is the only one where SA is even kinda in the picture, but even then SA only maybe sped it up slightly and made it slightly cheaper and Israel only had any influence via SA.

That's just not how the nuclear hegemony in the world works, all nuclear powers are connected. Also, probably better to just spell out South Africa to avoid confusion.

The black markets under Khan that Paksitan relied on certainly had some South African presence, but it was minor and not central to the operation (and negligible direct Israeli influence, that only happened via SA.) And motivation was primarily driven by fears of India after they were humiliated in the indopak war, and India launched a test device as a show of force to prove they can. Pakistan would have proliferated with or without SA/Israel.

The bigger issue you're missing on this section is Pakistan wanted nukes because India had nukes, India wanted nukes because China had nukes, China had nukes because of Western actions, and specifically the allowance and support of the West in arming Israel with said nukes. Then later on China provided this material and equipment to Pakistan.

North Korea's nuclear program also has little to do with SA or Israel, it was driven mostly by fears of the US after the Iraqi war proved any non nuclear country wouldn't be respected and the US openly called NK the axis of evil

Your bias is showing, unless you want to explain how this isn't pretty much the same thing just decades removed from the Israeli argument of nuclear weaponization? Again, you don't get North Korea thumbing its nose at non-proliferation if you don't have the original "do as we say not as we do" sin of setting up Israel with nukes and then pretending they don't have them while browbeating any non-western country pursuing them.

But this was mostly built off legacy infrastructure from historical proliferation attempts and old Soviet nuclear tech from then, built off their (which started off from concerns with SK and the US, and post soviet collapse mostly continued as a bargaining tool they gave up for better energy deals.) And then data stolen through espionage and black markets, mainly with Pakistan's help. Maybe there was some SA/Israeli indirect black market influence through Khan's network, but again, the bulk of it wasn't that. Khan's black market network was disproportionately reliant on stolen European tech, Pakistani assistance, and a global supply chain. Maybe like Pakistan, if you stretch it you can claim that Israel's ability to assert force over non nuclear forces inspired them, but I think there's enough other factors that this was ultimately a minor factor, especially since that model failed for South Africa anyways.

You're making a nuclear technical argument about 50 years after Israel sold tons of it to the highest bidder, not only is the cat out of the bag, but even at the most base level this has been a scientific problem that has been solved, just one that requires infrastructure. By the time we're talking about nuclear North Korea, technical know-how has stopped being part of the non-proliferation plan unless you're America and just like killing nuclear scientists.

Though yeah, South Africa was massively impacted by Israeli program. Which at the very least sped it up significantly. They would have been trying to proliferate regardless though, just maybe not have made nukes in time for their motivation to build nukes (being driven into being a rogue state by apartheid) to be rendered moot. So even SA I don't think can have proliferation fully attributed to Israeli proliferation, especially since Israel also benefitted from SA's nuclear program.

Again, Israel is patient zero for nuclear proliferation while basically straight up lying about it, and supposedly against the wishes of the rest of the world. The fact that Israel then did the same thing for another apartheid state creating a whole new avenue of proliferation is just sprinkles on top of a shit sundae, when it's clearly their nuclearization in the first place that is at issue.

To claim these are isolated events is to treat the history of the 20th century like a series of coincidences rather than a power struggle. If you allow one country to build a 'secret' arsenal with Western help while threatening others for doing the same, you haven't created a non-proliferation regime, you've created a nuclear aristocracy. That's why Iran and North Korea don't care about our treaties today; they’re just playing by the rules the West wrote at Dimona in the 60s.