WarSclerotic

Israel Hayom | EU says Iran presents PowerPoint proposal at Geneva nuclear talks.

Israel Hayom | Don’t fall for it.

Boaz Bismuth

Following the international community’s considerable excitement at the U.N. General Assembly about the winds of change blowing from Iran, today in Geneva is the real test:

In the next 48 hours we will be able to see whether words in Persian mean something, or that Iran, as we suspect, will continue as it has been doing until now at every P5+1 summit by trying to sweet talk the West into removing sanctions.

Since the last meeting half a year ago in Kazakhstan, on the surface of things, Iran has changed. President Hasan Rouhani has replaced Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, a diplomat familiar to the West, has replaced Ali Akbar Salehi. From its own perspective, Iran could not have chosen better promoters for its nuclear project, even if the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, continues to spew the regular rhetoric from back home.

Iran today has a tough dilemma on its hands: How does it become a nuclear threshold state and also remove the harsh economic sanctions? Let’s begin with Iran’s sacred goal of attaining militarized nuclear capabilities. Iran, as a regional power, wants to upgrade its status even further while simultaneously continuing to propagate the Shiite revolution across the globe. Additionally, the regime is obviously interested in its survival. The Libyan precedent in contrast to the success of the North Korean regime highlights for the Iranians why they must not relent on their nuclear ambitions, and primarily — which they themselves have said — not stop enriching uranium as the West has demanded.

Iran, however, finds itself in dire economic straits as a result of the sanctions. The sanctions imposed against its oil exports have led to a drastic fall in revenues. Some 86% of Iran’s budget is dependent on exporting oil and revenues have plummeted by around 50 percent. The economy has been damaged, the conservative bazaar merchants are furious, the black market is flourishing and corruption is rife. The top echelon of the Revolutionary Guard has exploited the situation to enrich itself, and while that is perhaps nice for some high-level officers, it is not good for the country’s long-term stability.

And as long as we are discussing stability, this is where the Iranian paradox lies: From Israel’s perspective, Iran is a destabilizing force, a supporter of terrorism and threat to Israel’s existence. In the world, incidentally, including in Washington, some see Iran as a stabilizing force in a stormy region, especially as it relates to Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Of course such sentiments cause officials in Jerusalem and the Gulf States to smile, nervously, that is.

The Islamic republic is doing everything in its power to increase expectations ahead of the talks in Geneva. It is striving to acquire the maximum — and quickly — while giving as little as possible in return. Behind Rouhani’s strategy of smiles is one objective: the removal of sanctions but mainly to ensure that no further sanctions are imposed by the Western body that perhaps poses the biggest threat to Iran, the U.S. Congress. This is why they will ask to expedite the removal of sanctions, and slowly provide mere gestures in exchange. As Zarif has stated, “a deal will take time.”

Rouhani knows that if at one time he could have primarily trusted the Russians and Chinese to back him in talks with the West, this time all of the delegations arriving in Geneva want results and will therefore work to achieve them. Iran, of course, can offer to limit its uranium enrichment levels to 3.5%. But with its new centrifuges it will be very simple for Iran to enrich the uranium it holds on to beyond that level, and is therefore a fairy-tale offer that the West must not accept. In other words: Iran must not be trusted. Regardless, it can be assumed that the headlines across the globe will focus on the first direct bilateral talks between Iran and the U.S. — and the clock will continue to tick down.

Iran cannot stop its nuclear program and the world cannot stop the clock from ticking.

Israel Hayom | Israel: Terror sponsor Iran has no right to enrich uranium.

In statement released just hours before nuclear talks in Geneva, Security Cabinet says sanctions must not be eased when they are so close to achieving their intended purpose • “It would be a historic mistake not to take full advantage of the sanctions.”

What Does ‘Getting the Bomb’ Mean? – Op-Eds – Israel National News.

It now seems likely that most of the public discussion of how or whether to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons misses the point of the current stage of the conflict. The practical question now seems to be the definition of the stage at which “Iran has the bomb.”

And it is pretty clear what is likely to happen.

Of course there still is a lot of uncertainty. But the direction in which events are now heading seems to indicate that there will an agreement between the US (or the UN) and Iran, which will commit Iran to not produce nuclear weapons that could be used as weapons to threaten or attack another country.

However, the agreement will not prevent Iran from finishing its program of building a large supply of highly enriched uranium and plutonium, which are the key ingredients needed to produce nuclear weapons.

It is probable that the coming agreements will deny Iran the right to do the research and development necessary to design practical nuclear weapons, or to produce the components of nuclear weapons once they have the necessary designs. But Iran says that they have no program to produce nuclear weapons, and that everything they are doing is for peaceful uses of nuclear energy. So it is not much of a concession for them to say they will not produce nuclear weapons.

The problem is that the research and development to design a nuclear weapon, and the manufacturing of actual weapon components, are difficult to detect. Thus, no outsider will be able to know whether Iran actually has any nuclear weapons, so long as Iran wishes to keep it secret and is able to prevent leaks.

The accepted diplomatic understanding will be that Iran does not have a bomb and has agreed not to obtain one. This will be seen by most as a great victory for Obama, though there will be skeptics who warn about what Iran will do secretly and in the future.

The design and production of nuclear weapons for one who has the necessary enriched uranium or plutonium probably requires at least a year. Yet nobody will know at any given time how much of that work Iran has already done.

Thus, after the likely agreement, Iran will be anywhere from a month to several years from having physical nuclear weapons in their hands, depending on how much work they are able to do clandestinely before the clock starts ticking. It is even possible that they already have, or will have in the next year or so, actual concealed nuclear weapons, regardless of likely potential agreements.

It seems likely that the US would be willing to accept an agreement having the effects described above. In return Iran would get a reduction or elimination of sanctions, reinforcement of the US policy not to support internal opposition to the Iranian revolutionary regime, and protection against an Israeli attack against Iranian nuclear weapons facilities.

As far as the US is concerned, such an agreement would mean that the US, its allies, and the UN were successful in preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons. But as far as Israel is concerned, such an agreement would be at least a partial failure to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. Because Israel would not have a reliable ability to detect whether Iran had a bomb at any time, and Iran quite possibly would have a “breakout capability,” that is, an ability to produce actual bombs too quickly for it to be reliably possible to prevent it.

The US says it believes that its intelligence would provide early warning. But experience shows that Israel cannot be confident of either the CIA’s ability to find covert Iranian weapons programs or of US political willingness to communicate intelligence reports that are diplomatically inconvenient. Of course Israel is safer if Iran has only a breakout capability, rather than actual physical bombs that desperate Iranians might use in a crisis.

The clear gain from such an agreement would be at least temporary protection against one of the main reasons many countries are trying to stop the Iranian nuclear program: an Iranian ability to use nuclear threats to support diplomatic or terrorist actions against countries of the region. So long as such an agreement is in force, and Iran denies that it has nuclear weapons – or any program to actually produce them from the uranium and plutonium they have – Iran cannot threaten to use nuclear weapons to cover aggression against its neighbors, and there is less pressure on others in the region to get their own nuclear weapons.

It’s not quite true that Iran can’t at the same time deny that it has nuclear weapons and use nuclear weapons to frighten its neighbors. When countries decide what they have to do to protect their security, and which side they should join, they don’t think only about what the situation is today. They ask which way things are going, and who will be able to protect them in coming years.

After likely agreements of the kind discussed here, Iran’s neighbors may think that, although Iran probably does not currently have nuclear weapons, there is a good chance that it will soon get them, and that it is not too soon to start to move under Iran’s umbrella. And there will still be some pressure for Saudi Arabia and Turkey to move towards getting their own nuclear weapons.

Although the plausible agreements with Iran would not meet Israel’s definition of “preventing Iran from getting the bomb,” if such agreements are signed it is very unlikely that Israel would take military action against the Iranian nuclear program. The case for such an attack would be much weaker. And there would be much less potential international support for an attack, and much stronger opposition from the US.

It is hard to see why Iran would not want to make the kind of deal discussed here. Even if they are determined eventually to get actual overt nuclear weapons that are ready to use, and which can be used to make threats, they would benefit for at least a year or so by promising not to do so. It would provide protection against Israel, weaken internal opposition, and provide relief from the sanctions while overtly producing more bomb material and covertly doing the work needed to produce actual bombs.

In brief, it seems likely that Iran will agree not to produce any nuclear weapons and that for a time it will officially be treated as if it does not have any actual nuclear bombs. But Israel will not feel safe, because there will be no way to be sure that Iran will not be able to produce a number of bombs – within a few months or less – from when Israel finds that its fears are coming true, and Iran is producing actual bombs.

Dr. Max Singer is a founder of the Hudson Institute and a senior research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies. He specializes in US defense policy, US-Israel relations, and long-term strategic planning.

Senior ministers demand world powers reject Iran’s ‘cosmetic concessions’ | The Times of Israel.

In unanimous decision ahead of Geneva talks, security cabinet — including Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni — back PM’s hard-line stance in nuclear standoff

By Raphael Ahren October 15, 2013, 10:48 am

Benjamin Netanyahu walking to a Cabinet meeting earlier this week. (photo credit: Emil Salman/POOL/Flash90)

As six world powers were set to discuss with Iran the country’s nuclear program Tuesday in Geneva, Israel’s top ministers unanimously adopted a resolution calling on the international community to reject any agreement that would stop short of demanding a full dismantling of the regime’s military nuclear program.

“The international community must reject Iran’s attempts to reach a deal that leaves it with the capability to develop nuclear weapons and must insist upon a genuine and sustainable agreement,” read the statement issued by the security cabinet, signalizing broad approval to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hawkish stance toward Iran within the government. “Iran believes it can get by with cosmetic concessions that would not significantly impede its path to developing nuclear weapons, concessions that could be reversed in weeks.”

The Security Cabinet consists of seven senior ministers, including Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett. It also includes more dovish politicians such as Finance Minister and Yesh Atid party chairman Yair Lapid and Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, who heads the center-left Hatnua party.

“An Iran with military nuclear capabilities would threaten world peace and stability as well as the security of countries across the Middle East, including Israel, which it threatens to annihilate,” the statement reads.

The cabinet’s statements refers to the talks between the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany — the so-called P5+1 — that are scheduled to take place Tuesday and Wednesday in Geneva. 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 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 before Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979.

Iran says it is willing to talk about reducing the rate of enrichment but has ruled out the removal of its uranium stockpile. US President Barack 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. The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the White House is considering an agreement that would allow Iran the right to maintain uranium-enrichment facilities on its territory, a possible compromise Jerusalem vehemently rejects.

“These negotiations begin at a time when the Iranian regime is under great pressure because of the sanctions and is desperately trying to have them removed. Sanctions must not be eased when they are so close to achieving their intended purpose,” the security cabinet statement read.

“Now is an opportune moment to reach a genuine diplomatic solution that peacefully ends Iran’s nuclear weapons program. However, this opportunity can be realized only if the international community continues to put pressure on Iran and does not ease the sanctions prematurely. It would be a historic mistake not to take full advantage of the sanctions, by making concessions before ensuring the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”

The statement reiterates Israel’s four demands to Iran laid out by Netanyahu in recent weeks: Cease all nuclear enrichment, remove already enriched uranium, dismantle the nuclear facilities in Qom and Natanz, and discontinue work at the plutonium-producing heavy water reactor in Arak.

“Unfortunately, we have seen no evidence that Iran is willing to accept such a solution. On the contrary, Iran continues to enrich uranium without letting up,” the statement read.

The ministers also declared that Jerusalem does not oppose Iran having a peaceful nuclear energy program, but insists that a peaceful program does not require the uranium enrichment or plutonium production. “Iran’s nuclear weapons program does,” the cabinet stated.

Report: US mulls letting Iran keep uranium enrichment facilities in nuclear deal | JPost | Israel News.

As Geneva talks set to begin, ‘Wall Street Journal’ reports that Obama administration weighing compromise by which Iran would maintain some enrichment facilities for civilian purposes; Israel, Saudis oppose move.

‘Iran plays brilliant chess game, West will fold’ – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Before talks resume between Iran, world powers on Tuesday, a US expert warns against Iranian ‘tricks’: ‘Khamenei doesn’t believe Obama will attack in Iran, will not give up critical issues’

Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – Iran and the world powers will start negotiations on Iran’s nuclear plan Tuesday, and Mark Dubowitz, an expert on the sanctions on Iran, claims the Islamic Republic is playing a brilliant chess game while the West is aware of only half the board.

“Iran wants to test Obama’s courage and Europe’s greed, to see if it can improve its economic situation without relinquishing its ‘right’ to enriching uranium,” he warned in an interview for Ynet.

Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank which focuses on national security and foreign policy, claimed that “Iran’s situation is hard, but not desperate. They can continue on the same path with foreign currency reserves for at least another year.

The UN Geneva offices, where talks will take place (Photo: AFP)

“Because of the sanctions, Iran has $80 billion lying in foreign banks, 50 of which are in China, India, Japan, South Korea and Turkey, all clients of Iranian oil.

“Iran can spend this money only in these countries because of the sanctions leveled against it, but there’s a limit to what it’s willing to buy there. Meanwhile the money’s piling up from further oil profits. Another $20 billion are in Russia, Austria, Switzerland, and maybe also in Malaysia and Georgia. Iran has full access to these funds.”

According to Dubowitz, the countries last mentioned “are not willing to enforce the sanctions properly, especially the Russians.” He added another $10 billion are stuck in various banks around the world, mainly in Europe, due to concerns of cooperation with the ostracized regime.

“Chinese merchendise in Tehran” (Photo: AFP)

“The Iranians have enough money pay for foreign imports. Even though most of the Iranian stores now sell Chinese merchandise instead of German, as they did before, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei‘s will won’t break.”

Secret funds

According to Dubowitz, this information is the result of the effort of a team of experts and analysts from the Roubini Global Economics firm, which worked together with the FDD and authored a report which describes the flow of money to Iran from over 170 countries.

“Our report has a part that deals with Iranian money that doesn’t appear in the books. Beyond the $80 billion I’ve mentioned, there are tens of billions of dollars we believe are controlled by Khamenei, by the Quds Force commander (the undercover arm of the Revolutionary Guard, which plans attacks abroad) Qasem Soleimani and by additional elements in the regime.

“These are assets, holdings, investments and real estate. It’s possible that what we discovered is a drop in the ocean,” Dubowitz said.

Sanctions not enough

While the FDD believe the international sanctions dealt Iran a painful blow, they claim they did not change the game – the Tehran regime is not concern by the possibility of an American military action and damage to its nuclear program.

“There’s a lot of pressure on the Iranian economy. This is the only reason Iran has agreed to the talks,” Dubowitz said. “The sanctions are not as great as they say. So far, they haven’t stopped Iran’s plan to acquire nuclear arms. The sanctions should have been maximal, to bring Iran’s economy to the edge of collapse. They were also supposed to make Khamenei realize he must stop the nuclear program or suffer an economic breakdown that will threaten the regime. We’re not even close to that. And every day that goes by, the Iranians are finding loopholes, the sanctions are not enforced, and no new sanctions are promoted.”

Cards exposed? Obama (Photo: Reuters)

Over the last few weeks Iran’s President Hassan Rohani unleashed what the media termed a “charm offensive,” which included moderate remarks and reaching out in peace to the West, especially to the US. Rohani’s apparent moderation led the five world powers – the US, Britain, Russia, France and China – together with Germany, to resume the talks with the Islamic Republic.

“Countries around the world are feeling the wind is changing, and they’re less afraid of doing business with Iran and of losing future profits due to deals with it,” Dubowitz said.

He also warned that “the Obama administration continues to believe the current sanctions are strong enough to fundemantaly change Khamenei’s calculations. But the Iranians are entering the negotiations with an advantage. This is based on the fact that every day the centrifuges keep spinning and new ones are installed. The Iranians are stockpiling more uranium and making headway in plutonium production.”

On the other side, Dubowitz claimed, “No one believes Obama will attack in Iran. Our only advantage is the sanctions.”

Iranian advantage

The American expert thinks Obama’s administration already hinted at what it’s willing to give up even before the negotiations began. “Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman was asked last week at the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee hearing if the US will object to allowing Iran enrich uranium, and she answered that this is the US’s maximal stance. If I sit in Tehran and watch this hearing, I reach the conclusion that this is the US’s opening position and that it can be lowered. The result: Iran’s stance is that uranium enrichment is its non-negotiable right.”

Rohani and Khamenei (Photo: AFP, KHAMENEI.IR)

On Sunday, Iran signaled that it will not allow its current stock of enriched uranium to be shipped out of the country as part of any deal. The Iranian negotiation team chief, Abbas Araghchi, said that “The shipping of materials out of the country is our red line.”

Iran also said it is prepared to negotiate over “the form, amount, and various levels of (uranium) enrichment,” though they will not cease it altogether.

According to Dubowitz, many signs have already been registered as to the West’s folding in the face of Iran. “Everyone are preparing the negotiation table for concessions. Everyone wants a deal. Iran must soften the world’s objections to enrichment to only 3.5% and then one day, at Tehran’s ease, we’ll wake up to a new reality.”