Steinitz: No need to be overly pessimistic on Iran
Steinitz: No need to be overly pessimistic on Iran | The Times of Israel.
Ahead of Tuesday’s nuclear talks, minister points to the dismantling of Libya’s program as model, warns world powers not to let Geneva 2013 become Munich 1938
Ahead of a new round of nuclear talks between Western powers and Iran starting Tuesday, Intelligence and Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz said a diplomatic solution was still possible, and said Tehran should discontinue its nuclear weapons program just as Libya did 10 years ago.
Israel will endorse any agreement that ensures Tehran’s inability to create nuclear weapons, including one that would grant the regime the use of nuclear energy for civilian purposes, he said Monday. “We want the Geneva talks to succeed. We don’t close the door on a diplomatic solution,” he said.
But Steinitz, a close Likud ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, also reiterated Israel’s position that the Islamic Republic must cease all uranium enrichment and ship out all already enriched material. Speaking to foreign media in Jerusalem, the minister warned the West against repeating the mistakes of 1938, drawing a direct comparison between Nazi Germany and Iran.
Rather than prematurely lifting sanctions on Iran, while the regime continues to work toward a nuclear weapons capability, the West should first insist on a complete end to Tehran’s enrichment activity and removal of already existing stockpiles of enriched material. Libya, which harbored nuclear ambitions but surprisingly abandoned them a decade ago, could serve as a model, he posited.
“Libya was trying to develop its military nuclear industry. It was discovered by the MI6, by the British intelligence service, in 2003, and soon after there was an agreement with Libya about its nuclear program,” Steinitz said.
Worried that the West might be ready to enter an agreement with Iran that would curb its military weapons program but allow it to continue low-level uranium enrichment, Steinitz pointed to North Korea. Over the last few years, the international community reached three agreements with the reclusive regime, all of which were violated and eventually allowed to Pyongyang to launch nuclear tests earlier this year.
There were vital lessons to be learned, he said, from the differences between the handling of the Libyan and North Korean crises. “All the agreements with North Korea were about stopping progress toward nuclear weapons, freezing the situation, stopping any further progress and improving supervision,” Steinitz said. “It didn’t work. The agreement with Libya was about dismantling the Libyan capacity to promote nuclear weapons, destroying the centrifuges or sending them to United States to be destroyed. Libya gave up its enrichment facility.”
On Tuesday and Wednesday, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany — the so-called P5+1 — will meet with Iran in Geneva to negotiate over Tehran’s nuclear program. The talks mark the first round of high-level negotiations since the June election of Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani, which has led to a limited but rapid rapprochement between the regime and the West. The détente, viewed extremely skeptically in Jerusalem, culminated last month in a 15-minute phone call between Rouhani and US President Barack Obama, the first conversation on such a level since Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979.
‘Nuclear civilian energy: yes — uranium enrichment: no. It’s that simple’
Obama told Netanyahu he would be “clear-eyed” in the US’s engagement with Tehran but made plain his hope that the nuclear standoff could be resolved diplomatically and in the near future.
“Right now, the window for diplomacy is cracking open. But I want you to know that our eyes are open, too,” US Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday. “While we seek a peaceful resolution to Iran’s nuclear program, words must be matched with actions. In any engagement with Iran, we are mindful of Israel’s security needs… And I believe firmly that no deal is better than a bad deal.”
Israel insists than any agreement prohibit Iran from independently enriching uranium and require the regime to ship out its stockpile of already enriched material. “What we’re saying is a very simple thing: Demand the only rational, logical, satisfactory solution. Nuclear civilian energy: yes. Uranium enrichment: no. It’s that simple,” Steinitz said.
Iran says it is willing to talk about reducing the rate of enrichment but has ruled out the removal of its uranium stockpile. “Of course we will negotiate regarding the form, amount, and various levels of enrichment, but the shipping of materials out of the country is our red line,” Deputy Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araqchi said Sunday.
Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araqchi. (screen capture: Youtube/PressTV)
If Iran’s nuclear program is not intended to produce a bomb, as Tehran insists, it need not insist on enriching uranium, or refuse to remove already enriched material, according to Steinitz. “If it’s for a purely civilian purpose, there is no real reason to keep enrichment facilities, or to keep the already enriched material. Let’s deliver it to France, or to Russia, or Holland, and you can get in return nuclear fuel,” he told reporters at Monday’s event, which was organized by The Israel Project.
The removal of “most of the already enriched material” is not exclusively an Israeli demand, but is anchored in several UN Security Council resolutions, the minister added. “And why should Iran escape from Security Council legal decisions that are already in place? If they really want to change their relations to the world, first they need to comply… with already existing Security Council resolutions. Once you comply, you can be accepted into the international community and we can discuss other things, including lifting of the sanctions.”
“We should all do our best to ensure that Geneva 2013 will not become Munich 1938,” Steinitz added, referring to Europe’s appeasement of Adolf Hitler before World War II.
However, the minister made a particular effort not to sound too fatalistic, portraying Israel as optimistic regarding this week’s negotiations. “If you take the last few decades, there are many successful cases: Libya was trying to get nuclear weapons — failed. Syria failed. Iraq failed. South Africa gave up its nuclear weapons. Ukraine gave up some nuclear weapons that were in those territories.
“So if you look around,” he continued, “many countries gave up, willingly or unwillingly, their military nuclear projects and there is only one failure so far on behalf of the international community, and this is North Korea. And one case which is still open, and this is Iran. I don’t think that we have to be necessarily pessimistic. Sooner or later there might a positive solution. But it depends on us, and by ‘us’ I mean the West and not necessarily little Israel.”
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
October 14, 2013 at 7:15 PM
We have conflicting assessments of the current situation.
While John Kerry sees the “Diplomatic window cracking open” Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi declares “Shipping out the [enriched] material is a red line for Iran,”.
So what’s there to negotiate?
In spite of the American reassurances that the US will negotiate with ‘eyes open’ and ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’ such assurances are utterly meaningless because the US so far have failed to give us a convincing answer what they will do if negotiations fail.
They have not given us a clear alternative other then lukewarm, wishy washy and ambigous talk about military options which are not talked about anymore anyway because one suspects strongly that they never were seriously considered.
And so, absent other alternatives, the US will have to accept any deal, even a bad one.
It boils down to this: Either have a credible alternative or spare us the whole circus.
Because Iran will not agree to any deal that satisfies the demands of the West, much less that of Israel.
Because in the end the West will have to do precisely that: accept a bad deal.
Of course they can always declare that no deal could be reached and go on to increase the sanctions because military action is out of the question.
The winners in this game can only be the Iranians because they have gained more months or even a half year or a year time during which they advanced their nuclear program full speed.
If Israel waits for this game to play out they will be clearly the losers. I don’t believe that they can wait that long. They shouldn’t wait this long. It’s too dangerous.
October 14, 2013 at 8:04 PM
May be in the spirit of what was just written above, may be just the will to contribute to my learned colleague analysis, I’ll say that a shortly but very juicy analysis of the Iranian – US negotiations & Israel was just transmitted on Fox. The principal figure was ”KT” MacFarland and what she has just said was amazing. The spirit of the report was: Iran is going to pretend that its going to stop the military nuclear progress, the US is going to pretend that is believing them and a peace treaty Iran -US will be signed, because 0bama wants it badly(the analyst opinion). She also said the magic words ” Israel is in trouble ” in this situation; ”the military option” was reminded only linked to Israel and as a very remote possibility, because the US cannot and doesn’t want such a possibility from its own part. Really amazing things, told with simplicity. We, from our part, also learned suddenly some aspects of this new cards game:
1.By conducting negotiations directly with the US (0bama) Iran bought to itself an insurance against any Israeli openly military action, because is absurd – they say – that Israel will attack Iran while Iran is negotiating with the US.
2.The nuclear program will be unaffected, while the negotiations will get all the media attention.
3.Israel is neutralized, isolated, while Iran is conducting the dialogue with the Americans; Israel cannot intervene in a diplomatic mode to change any outcome from those negotiations. An agreement US – Iran after all those years is the wet dream of 0bama, as a part of his legacy, as he is seeing that.
Until now, those were the thinking / acting points of all the sides implicated, but Israel; before Israel, a really serious, grave problem.
Its like the Gordian Knot, if you prefer. The solution is to terminate this long story by liquidated the Iranian threat and terminate even Iran, but will Israel do that while the negotiations will take place?
Every time Israel postponed the inevitable, the new situation was more difficult, less proper for the military solution. The actual situation, because all those previous postponements, is the most difficult of all, almost impossible for conducting military operations while the negotiations will take place. Its almost impossible, but not absolutely impossible. May be we’ll seen amazing things. I, from my part, will continue to believe. But I also want all here to know that is a great distance between one wishing and the reality. I know that, too.
October 14, 2013 at 8:52 PM
Luis, I take the liberty to quote from my own article.
To further support my point I want to quote first from an ISIS document from Oktober 3.
ISIS is an independent instiute which is an expert on the Iranian nuclear issue.
This document was released after I wrote my article but there were previous documents which also support my point.
I strongly recommend everyone reading this document.
I believe that Israel is serious about the military option but my proposal would make it easier on a diplomatic and political level to stop the phony ‘peace and love train’ very abruptly and set the stage for a strike.
From http://www.isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/Testimony_Albright_senate_foreign_relations_committee_oct_2_2013.pdf
Emphasis by me.
“Iran’s current nuclear infrastructure is large. It has two gas centrifuge sites, the underground Natanz plants and the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant. It has stated plans to build a total of ten enrichment plants and suspicions are growing that it IS BUILDING ANOTHER ONE IN SECRET. It is operating a large power reactor at Bushehr and maintains relatively large uranium conversion and fuel fabrication facilities near Esfahan. It is nearing completion of a heavy water reactor at Arak that appears better suited to make plutonium for nuclear weapons than to produce medical isotopes for civilian use.”
From my own article:
“So, what can Israel do to change the game
The Iranians have always done their enrichment work and military experiments in secret. The existence of both Natanz and Fordow were only admitted by the Iranians when their existence was revealed by the intelligence services or dissidents.
I believe that there are more such secrets sites. The ISIS institute hinted at the existence of a possible secret laser enrichment site.
I also believe that Israel has good intelligence on the Iranian program because its existence depends on it. There are also plausible reports about Israeli human intelligence operating in Iran.
This leads me to believe that Israel knows about such secrets sites.
If that is indeed the case all Israel has to do is expose these sites. This would create several things. It would end the charade that is currently going on and create a strong sense of urgency. The Iranians would be totally exposed as liars who cannot be trusted. It would show that they are not serious. It would show that there is no point for the US or anyone negotiating with them. Most importantly it would show that they have crossed the rubicon already and that there is no more time left to waste. Such a move would increase diplomatic support and justification for an Israeli strike and also public support in the US and around the world.
After having taking back the initiative in the public arena Israel should immediately follow up with a military strike.”
October 14, 2013 at 9:29 PM
I read closely what you have published and parts of the above comment I learned before, too. Yes, it sounds very logic. Israel in a sudden move disclosing Iran, while the negotiations with the US are in full gear. But, Artaxes, I’ll tell you a ”secret” now that it might surprise you and especially the association I’ll make. The story goes like this: One day, there were two good friends. In time, one of them fell heavily in love with a beautiful girl. They seemed very happy together and the boy was very in love. One day, his friend discovered and even bring him prove of obvious betrayal from his girlfriend. In this stage, his friend wasn’t open for any discussion on the issue. Nothing his friend will bring to his knowledge will change anything regarding he and his girlfriend. An eternal story from life, being true here, too. Look, the people – Europe and America – are tired of this Iranian issue. Israeli PM threats – serious as they can be – aren’t news anymore. They all want to enter into the bed with the Iranian bride, and 0bama wants to be the first. After him, France and Britain are waiting in line. Three lovers and one bride. A Persian bride. 1000 nights stories? But enough with this romance. Look, the Israeli PM is kicking in, from behind a hidden door. 0bama is suddenly worried, raising his had from the nuptial bed : ” You are late, my friend! And you are also interrupting me and my Persian beauty …But what are you holding in you hand? It looks like roses, but…” And ”Booom!” Ok, then. We’ll see what we’ll see.
October 14, 2013 at 9:42 PM
I understand. You make a very good point.
Which is exactly why Israel shouldn’t wait until they are in bed and even begin to … you know what.
I hope that they have the wisdom to do it.
October 14, 2013 at 9:55 PM
You just killed me, man, with …you know what. We have to keep up the moral and the good spirit. Happy you enjoyed my story.
October 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM
…and for being optimistic : http://www.americanthinker.com/cartoons/
October 14, 2013 at 10:27 PM
Hilarious.
Ok, good night you all.
For raising the spirit.
October 14, 2013 at 11:41 PM
All the Persian bride need say is “I have no plans to attack anyone.” The Persian bide would then have the whole world falling over itself to bed with her, and she’d get most anything she wants. Then, after the deal, when everyone is looking the other way KABOOOOM!
October 15, 2013 at 2:56 AM
Something tells me it’s going to be a short honeymoon.
October 14, 2013 at 8:12 PM
Tehran sets atomic red lines ahead of latest meeting with world powers in Geneva on Tuesday
.
October 14, 2013 at 9:22 PM
Off topic.
The Guardian: Police foil ‘Mumbai-style’ terrorist plot in London, say security sources
Four men held on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism after surveillance operation
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/police-mumbai-style-terrorist-plot-london
October 14, 2013 at 9:29 PM
Hey guys, it would be good if someone would tell the Iranians and other negotiators that if Iran wants to negotiate, then first stop all its nuclear plants, facillities, etc, ship out all its nuclear material and then negotiate, ——- at least shut down all the nuclear facilities, during the negotiations, what a joke these negotiations and the nuclear facilities keep going and spinning more centrifuges, enriching more nuclear material, thanks Smiley.
October 14, 2013 at 9:37 PM
That wont help and wont happen, either. The Iranians invested huge money, efforts and prestige in their nuclear program. No negotiation will convince them to hold their program or to reverse it.
No negotiation will do that. Only a decapitation will do it.
October 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM
Agree, but that will not happen, so we end up whit a nuclear Iran.
October 14, 2013 at 11:44 PM
Gentlemen I do not like your comments, i,am the six pack dumb ass Joe here.
October 15, 2013 at 12:04 AM
But this is the new bright generation , in a couple of years they are the political face of the USA and now they are voting whit knowledge, not.