Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz joined Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and other government ministers, warning against the proposed deal world powers are likely to sign with Iran on Friday on its nuclear program.
“The deal that is being formulated with Iran is a historic mistake, that could have grave consequences on Israel and the entire world,” he said.
“With a smile attack and meaningless compromises, Iran managed to fool the West and receive significant sanction relief – a relief that could cause the deterioration of the entire sanctions regime and make it harder to reach an agreement for a full disarmament of Iran’s military nuclear program,” he added.
This agreement will allow Iran both to keep its enriched uranium, and to build a plutonium reactor in Arak, Steinitz concluded.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry: If IDF presence in the West Bank persists it will foster a growing sense that peace is not possible with leadership committed to non-violence • “You may wind up with leadership that is committed to violence,” Kerry says.
Shlomo Cesana, Daniel Siroyti and Mati Tuchfeld
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, center, arrives in Israel on Friday, Nov. 8, 2013
|
Photo credit: AP
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry warned Israel on Thursday that it could face a third Palestinian uprising and deepening international isolation if the American-brokered peace negotiations failed.
“Well, the good news is that both leaders are committed to proceeding forward, both leaders know that there are difficulties but we work through these difficulties. I think each of them are deeply committed on behalf of their people,” Kerry said during a televised interview on Channel 2.
Kerry addressed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s earlier statements that it was agreed that Israel would be able to continue construction beyond the Green Line during negotiations in exchange for releasing Palestinian prisoners:
“That is not the agreement. The agreement, specifically, was that there would be a release of the pre-Oslo prisoners,104, who’ve been in prison now for many, many years, who would be released in exchange for the PA not proceeding to the UN during that period of time.
“Now, the Palestinian leadership made it absolutely clear: they believe the settlements are illegal. They object to the settlements, and they are in no way condoning the settlements, but they knew that Israel would make some announcements. They knew it. But they don’t agree with it. And they don’t support it. They disagreed with it. In fact, they said, ‘We don’t agree. We do not think you should be doing settlements.’ We, the United States, say the same thing. We do not believe the settlements are legitimate. We think they’re illegitimate. And we believe that the entire peace process would in fact be easier if these settlements were not taking place,” Kerry said in the interview.
Kerry warned of the potentially dangerous outcome of another deadlocked peace process. “The alternative to getting back to the talks is the potential of chaos. I mean, does Israel want a third Intifada?” he asked, referring to the danger of a new Palestinian uprising to follow those that erupted in 1987 and 2000.
“I believe that if we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis, if we do not find the way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of Israel, there will be an increasing campaign of delegitimization of Israel that has been taking place in an international basis, that if we do not resolve the question of settlements, and the question of who lives where and how and what rights they have, if we don’t end the presence of Israeli soldiers perpetually within the West Bank, then there will be an increasing feeling that if we cannot get peace with a leadership that is committed to non-violence, you may wind up with leadership that is committed to violence,” he said.
Kerry warned of the dangers of maintaining the status quo and of some Israelis’ perceived complacency. “I know there are people who have grown used to this … ‘Oh we feel safe today. We have the wall, we’re not in a day-to-day conflict, we’re doing pretty well economically.’ Well, I’ve got news for you [Israel], Today’s status quo will not be tomorrow’s or next year’s. Because if we don’t resolve this issue, the Arab world, the Palestinians, neighbors, others, are going to begin again to push in a different way.”
Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon responded to Kerry’s statements in the interview. “There is no need to fear threats of whether there will or won’t be a third Intifada,” he said.
“We have been in an open and ongoing conflict [with the Palestinians], which as far as the Palestinians are concerned does not end in 1967 lines. There is Sheikh Munis — Tel Aviv, Majdal — Ashkelon. We got out of the Gaza Strip and they continue to attack us. They raise their youth to believe that Haifa and Acre are Palestinian ports and more. There is no sign of compromise here. Therefore we are likely not going to solve this based on what we thought. This does not mean we want to control them, they have political autonomy and good thing they do. We will have to be smart, and not fear threats of whether there will or won’t be a third Intifada,” he said.
The Israeli Right was largely upset by Kerry’s statements in the Channel 2 interview. “I don’t remember the last time the U.S. released terrorists, and it demands that we do so as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians, who in return continue their incitement and rile up the next generation of terrorists,” Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon said.
Coalition Chairman MK Yariv Levin said it is Israel’s prerogative to build where it chooses. “Israel’s right to build anywhere on its land cannot be questioned. Given the reality in the Middle East, Secretary of State Kerry’s statements, despite their good intentions, only encourage Arab extremists and bring down the chances for peace. I call on the American government to make it clear to the Palestinians that they must refrain from any attempt to harm Israel in international bodies,” Levin said.
Kerry expressed optimism on Thursday after meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Jordanian King Abdullah in Amman, it Kerry’s second meeting with Abbas in 24 hours.
Israel Hayom has learned that there exists an agreement with Palestinians in which they would sign an accord with Israel declaring an end to the conflict and to their demands. Netanyahu has put an emphasis on including a clause calling Israel the Jewish homeland and explained that agreeing to it will make it clear to Palestinians and Israeli Arabs that they cannot make any more sovereign claims inside Israel. Justice Minister and chief negotiator Tzipi Livni supports Netanyahu’s demand, but Finance Minister Yair Lapid does not.
Livni supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict such that each nation provides a home for each people, Israel for the Jews and Palestine for the Palestinians. In the past Livni was the one that convinced the Bush administration that a Palestinian state would be the solution for the Palestinian refugee problem.
Until this week, most Israelis thought of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry as a naive nice guy. His ardent enthusiasm for basically impossible peace talks with the Palestinians was viewed as stop-gap diplomacy, at best; a fool’s errand, at worst.
But Thursday night, in his joint television interview to Israeli and Palestinian television, we “discovered” a different Kerry: nasty, threatening, one-sided, blind to the malfeasance and unreliability of Palestinian leaders, and dangerously oblique to the explosive situation he himself is creating.
Channeling the Palestinian line, Kerry showed no appreciation whatsoever for Israel’s positions and concerns (aside from the usual throw-away vague protestations of concern for Israel’s “security”).
His warnings about the coming isolation of Israel and of a third intifada unless Israel quickly allows the emergence of a “whole Palestine” and ends it “perpetual military occupation” of Judea and Samaria amount to unfriendly pressure. Worse still, Kerry is trading treacherously in ugly self-fulfilling prophecy.
There was always a high probability that the Palestinians would eventually use the predictable collapse of the talks as an excuse for more violence and renewal of their lawfare against Israel in international forums. Now they have John Kerry’s seal of approval for doing so.
Kerry has basically laid out the Obama administration’s understanding (dare I say, acceptance) of the campaign to delegitimize and isolate Israel — unless Israel succumbs to Palestinian and international dictates for almost complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Kerry is effectively telling the Palestinians that they should make sure the talks fail, and then Israel will be forced to give in.
So now the Palestinians know clearly what to do. They don’t really want a circumscribed, hemmed-in, mini-state of the like that Israel could agree too. They have never wanted the “sovereign cage” of a Palestinian state that Israel can contemplate (as Ahmad Khalidi and Saeb Erekat have categorized the generous Barak and Olmert proposals). What they have always wanted is “runaway” statehood, and the total delegitimization of Israel, alongside an ongoing campaign to swamp Israel demographically and overwhelm Israel diplomatically.
Strategically then, there is no good reason for Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to agree to any negotiated accord with Israel. An accord will hem in Palestinian ambitions. An accord will grant Israel the legitimacy that Kerry warns we are losing. An accord will grant Israel the legitimacy “to act in order to protect its security needs,” as Tzipi Livni keeps on saying.
Obviously then, Abbas knows what to do. By stiffing Israel and holding to his maximalist demands, Abbas pushes Israel into Kerry’s punishment corner. He spurs on the isolation of Israel that Mr. Kerry is oh-so-worried-about. He creates ever-greater pressure on Israel to concede ever more to Palestinian ambitions.
In short, Kerry’s onslaught last night only encourages Palestinian obduracy, and strips the peace process of any realism.
Over the past 30 years, Israelis have shifted their views tremendously. They’ve gone from denying the existence of a Palestinian people to recognition of Palestinian peoplehood and national aspirations; and from insisting on exclusive Israeli sovereignty and control of Judea, Samaria and Gaza to acceptance of a demilitarized Palestinian state in these areas. Israel has even withdrawn all-together from Gaza, and allowed a Palestinian government to assume authority over 95 percent of West Bank residents. Israel has made the Palestinian Authority three concrete offers for Palestinian statehood over more than 90 percent of West Bank territory plus Gaza.
Palestinians have made no even remotely comparable moves toward Israel.
What Kerry should be doing is disabusing the Palestinians of the notion that they can fall back on bogus, maximalist demands as their uncompromising bottom line. He should be dialing down Palestinian expectations and bringing Palestinians toward compromise, no less than Israelis. He should be pressing them to close the “peace gap” by accepting the historic ties of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the legitimacy of Israel’s existence in the Middle East as a Jewish state (and that, in principle, includes Judea and Samaria).
He should be calling on them to renounce the resettlement of Palestinian refugees in pre-1967 Israel, and to end their support for and glorification of Palestinian suicide-bombers and missile launchers against Israel’s civilian population, and to end the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel warlike propaganda that fills the Palestinian airwaves.
Kerry should make clear to the Palestinians that if they don’t compromise with Israel, the world will stand by Israel, will not isolate Israel, and will not tolerate Palestinian violence against Israel.
Instead, Kerry chose to launch a full-bore attack on Netanyahu and on all Israelis who (in Kerry’s words) pig-headedly “feel safe today” and “feel they’re doing pretty well economically.” He laid out the consequences for Israel of disobeying America (no safety and no prosperity). He laid out no similar consequences for the Palestinians if they remain intransigent.
¶ TEL AVIV — With fissures over Iran deepening between the United States and Israel, Secretary of State John Kerry met here Friday with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before flying to Geneva to join talks over a potential interim deal on the Iranian nuclear program.
¶ Mr. Kerry’s decision to cut short a tour of the Middle East and go to Geneva has buoyed expectations that the United States and five other major powers are poised to sign a preliminary accord with Iran, which could freeze its uranium enrichment in return for some easing of sanctions.
¶ State Department officials tried to manage expectations, noting that Mr. Kerry had previously agreed to take part in the talks if it could help bridge gaps and that the issues on the table remained complex.
¶ The State Department’s spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, said in a statement that Mr. Kerry would go to Geneva “in an effort to help narrow the differences in the negotiations.” He is to meet with Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, and the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, who oversees the multiparty negotiations.
¶ In an indication that diplomatic momentum for a deal could be accelerating, news reports said Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, William Hague, the British foreign secretary, and Guido Westerwelle, the German foreign minister, were planning to join the talks on Friday.
¶ Word of a potential deal drew a blistering response from Mr. Netanyahu. Speaking to reporters at Ben-Gurion Airport before he met with Mr. Kerry, he said, “I understand that the Iranians are walking around very satisfied in Geneva, as well they should be, because they got everything and paid nothing. Everything they wanted.”
¶ Calling it both “the deal of the century” and a “very bad deal,” Mr. Netanyahu said, “Israel utterly rejects it.” He said his concerns were shared by other countries in the region.
¶ “Israel is not obliged by this agreement,” he added, “and Israel will do everything it needs to defend itself and the security of its people.”
¶ Mr. Netanyahu has lobbied fiercely in recent weeks for the United States to redouble, rather than relax, sanctions. He said a deal would be a “grievous historic error,” enabling Iran to keep enriching uranium and preserve the option of developing nuclear weapons.
¶ Mr. Kerry was adamant during his visit to Israel this week that the West would not rush into a deal. In a joint interview with Israeli and Palestinian journalists on Thursday, he said, “I have said many times we will not make a deal that’s a bad deal, that leaves any of our friends or ourselves exposed to a nuclear weapons program.”
¶ The United States, Mr. Kerry said, also would not dismantle its sanctions regime until it had “absolute clarity about what is happening.” Administration officials said a more likely option would be for the West to free up some Iranian assets that are frozen in overseas banks.
¶ While Iran was expected to dominate the discussion between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Netanyahu, the secretary of state was likely to press the Israeli leader on negotiations with the Palestinians, which he tried to reinvigorate in several days of shuttle diplomacy here.
¶ Mr. Kerry met with the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, in Amman, Jordan on Thursday evening. Mr. Abbas has complained that Israel is continuing to approve settlement construction in the West Bank, poisoning the atmosphere for direct negotiations.
¶ Mr. Netanyahu returned fire on Wednesday, saying that the Palestinians were inciting discord and manufacturing crises in order to avoid making difficult decisions in the negotiations.
¶ On Friday, he appeared to harden his stance further, telling reporters “I will never compromise on Israel’s security and our vital interests, not in the face of any international pressure. I think the pressure has to be put where it belongs. That is on the Palestinians who refuse to budge.”
¶ At times this week, Mr. Kerry has appeared frustrated with the Israelis. On Wednesday, he appealed to the Israeli authorities to keep a lid on new settlement construction during the negotiations.
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis November 8, 2013, 1:34 PM (IDT)
Falling-out between two allies over nuclear Iran
Israel’s most painful lesson from the two-day Geneva conference on Iran’s nuclear program is that the man who guaranteed to defend Israel’s security, President Barack Obama, is now marching hand in hand with Tehran towards a nuclear-armed Iran.
–
This is the reality behind the fuss and excitement surrounding the signing ceremony in Geneva Friday, Nov. 8, and the slick words gushing forth to put a convincing face on the interim deal put together between Iran and the Six Powers Thursday and Friday.
President Obama broke the news to NBC Thursday night: “There is a possibility of a phased agreement, the first part of which would stop Iran from further expanding its nuclear program. We are offering modest relief from the sanctions, but keeping the core sanctions in place, so that if it turned out during the course of the six months when we’re trying to resolve some bigger issues that they’re backing out of the deal or… not giving us assurances that they’re not developing a nuclear weapon, we can crank that dial back up,” the US president said.
Friday morning, when US Secretary of State John Kerry was heading for Geneva to join Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif for the final signing stage, it was still unclear what Iran is willing to concede.
This is because no one was ready to admit exactly what the agreed “freeze” applied to and how far it is from “dismantlement “
Iran had in fact already achieved all the makings of a nuclear bomb and was holding them in place ready for assembly. Uranium enrichment will furthermore continue although at a low grade.
At any moment, Tehran may decide to assemble those components and produce a bomb and has the capacity to do so before the US or Israel catch on to what is happening.
The accord to be signed Friday elevates Iran automatically to the rank of a nuclear power, which already holds Syria, Iraq and Lebanon under its sway. The radical alliance binding Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Syria’s Bashar Assad and Hizballah’s Hassan Nasrallah has triumphed. Israel fell down badly by trusting the Obama administration to break this axis up before it spreads more violence and havoc across the region.
Before setting off for Geneva, Secretary Kerry warned Israel that the breakdown of talks with the Palestinians would result in a third “intifada.”
But he made no reference to the Iranian nuclear intifada now looming over Israel and the entire Middle East.
Before coming to Jerusalem, the US Secretary visited Riyadh. But there was nothing much for him to discuss with King Abdullah and Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal, because both had accepted that there is no chance of turning the Obama administration from its chosen track which results in Iran enjoying the freedom to pursue a nuclear weapon amid progressively enhanced sanctions relief.
Some time ago, the Saudis took what they saw as appropriate preemptive action.
On Jan. 1, 2013, Crown Prince Salman, deputy premier and defense minister, traveled to Islamabad and commissioned Pakistan to build nuclear weapons for a multibillion fee. Those weapons were assembled in Pakistan and held ready for transfer to Saudi Arabia at a moment’s notice.
Last week, former Israeli Military Intelligence (AMAN) chief Amos Yadlin told a conference in Sweden that if Iran got the bomb, “the Saudis will not wait one month. They have already paid for the bomb and will go to Pakistan and bring back what they need.”
So the countdown to a nuclear Saudi Arabia begins with the signing of the “interim” Iranian nuclear deal in Geneva. Its first result will be the deployment of a Sunni Muslim Arab nuke versus a Shiite Iranian bomb. Israel’s reputed nuclear program remains in its decades-old holding position.
The burgeoning nuclear standoff will inject a further unstable element in the volatile Middle East.
Washington has not chosen that road out of stupidity or blindness as some dismayed Israeli officials are saying. The plan appears to be not only to present Israel with a nuclear challenge, but to put a damper on Russia’s strategic and military momentum in the region.
Even if this calculus proves correct it will take years for it to unfold.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu admitted he was stunned by the terms of the accord negotiated with Iran, calling it a “monumental, historic mistake” and “Iran’s deal of the century.”
Tehran has conceded nothing and receives limited sanctions relief, he said.
The interim agreement, said Netanyahu, buries the possibility of a peaceful final accord for dismantling Iran’s nuclear program once and for all. “Israel is not obliged by this agreement and will do everything it needs to do to defend itself and defend the security of its people,” he said.
His words carried two messages:
1. Israel has abandoned its trust in Barack Obama ever complying with his pledge to its security and will henceforth act on its own.
2. Israel’s only remaining course now is to exercise its military option against Iran’s nuclear capability – whether openly or covertly.
For five years, Binyamin Netanyahu has repeatedly warned the world that Israel was ready for military action to preempt a nuclear-armed Iran. Each successive repetition was received on a diminishing scale of credibility. His response to the Geneva accord is therefore anyone’s guess.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has laid a foundation to impose its will on the U.S. and continue its illicit nuclear-weapons program. The elements of a negotiated agreement outlined today in Geneva show the Obama administration engaging in concessionary bargaining with a rogue regime.
Abbas Araqchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, declared the U.S. and its partners “accepted the framework of Iran’s proposal,” the components of which entail sanctions relief in exchange for Iran’s suspension of some elements of its nuclear program.
There is no sign that Iran is willing to permanently stop its uranium enrichment, close its Arak and Fordo nuclear facilities, and ship its already 3.5 percent–enriched uranium outside of the country.
Moreover, there is no definitive method of verification to ensure that Iran’s clerical regime — a notoriously deceptive group — will comply with an agreement (Remember the North Korean debacle.)
In choosing to grant Iran concessions, the U.S. ignores that it has crucial economic leverage to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program. Bloomberg recently reported that “Iran’s economy will contract 1.5 percent this year after shrinking 1.9 percent in 2012,” while Trevor Houser, an economics expert, says, “Right now, Iran needs to sell its oil far more than the rest of the world needs to buy it.”
The proposal would allow Iran to retain the capabilities to make nuclear weapons. Israel totally opposes these proposals … I believe that adopting them is a mistake of historic proportions.
That is more or less the whole story. There will be more details, but it seems that the US, which could stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, has decided not to. Not only will it not make a credible military threat, it has folded even before exhausting the option of sanctions.
This feels so … 1938. A vicious civil war chews up a country, which is serving as a proxy for the major combatants, who are arming themselves for the big show. The ‘responsible’ nations of the world try to defuse an aggressor’s violence by a policy of appeasement. Trita Parsi asks “Do we want a deal or a war?” but maybe we’ll make a deal and get a war anyway.
Netanyahu has been accused of ‘overreacting’, he’s been called ‘shrill’ and his demand that sanctions be increased rather than reduced until Iran actually dismantles its program is said to be ‘unreasonable’. He is “out of step,” say diplomats. I am sure they said the same about Czech President Edvard Beneš in 1938.
Netanyahu is quite rational, aware of the danger facing his country from the fanatically anti-Israel regime in Iran, whose officials have said over and over that they intend to destroy it. And now they are getting nuclear weapons. How is he supposed to sound?
Netanyahu is on a collision course with the US. The US will do practically anything to keep Israel from attacking Iran, and will punish her if she does. And Netanyahu sees that he simply will have no choice but to attack Iran.
Keep in mind that most of those, like Meir Dagan, that opposed an attack did so because they thought that the diplomatic option might work, not that Iran could be allowed to have the bomb. And diplomacy — tough sanctions — might have worked, if it were not for the cowardice, ignorance and stupidity of the Obama Administration.
But it is not going to be tried. There is going to be a deal. And then there is going to be a war.
Tensions reach boiling point: PM briefly meets Kerry before latter heads to Geneva; says Israel ‘not obliged’ to agreement between Tehran world powers, adds ‘Iranians got everything and paid nothing
srael utterly rejects a mooted world powers deal with Iran aimed at ending a long-running row over its nuclear ambitions and will not be bound by such an accord, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday.
Speaking as headed into a meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry, Netanyahu told reporters that Iran had got “the deal of the century”.
“Israel utterly rejects it and what I am saying is shared by many in the region, whether or not they express that publicly. Israel is not obliged by this agreement and Israel will do everything it needs to do to defend itself and the security of its people,” he said.
Israel has repeatedly warned that it might strike Iran if it did not halt its nuclear program, accusing Tehran of seeking to build atomic weapons. Iran says its various nuclear facilities are geared to civilian needs.
Netanyahu was meeting Kerry for the third time in barely 48 hours. The US secretary of state was due to fly immediately afterwards to Geneva where Iran and six world powers are holding negotiations.
The United States has said world powers will consider relaxing some economic sanctions against Iran if it takes verifiable steps to limit its nuclear program.
Israel has called for the sanctions to remain in place until Iran has dismantled its entire enrichment program.
“I understand that the Iranians are walking around very satisfied in Geneva as well they should be because they got everything and paid nothing,” Netanyahu said.
“Everything they wanted, they wanted relief of sanctions after years of a grueling sanctions regime, they got that. They are paying nothing because they are not reducing in any way their nuclear enrichment capability,” he said.
An Israeli official declined to say what deal was brewing, or how Israel knew the details.
PM: Jerusalem ‘utterly rejects’ possible agreement with Tehran, warns Israel will do what it needs to defend itself
By Times of Israel staff and APNovember 8, 2013, 7:57 amUpdated: November 8, 2013, 11:00 am
Israel is not bound by any nuclear deal the West makes with Iran on its controversial nuclear program, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told US Secretary of State John Kerry Friday morning, at their third meeting in just 72 hours, ahead of Kerry’s trip to Geneva for continued nuclear talks with Iran in the framework of the P5+1 negotiations — a last-minute decision that suggests a deal could be imminent.
“I understand that the Iranians are walking around very satisfied in Geneva, as well they should be, because they got everything, and paid nothing. They wanted relief from sanctions after years of a grueling sanctions regime. They got that. They are paying nothing, because they are not reducing in any way their nuclear enrichment capability. So Iran got the deal of the century and the international community got a bad deal,” Netanyahu said.
“This is a very bad deal. Israel utterly rejects it and what I am saying is shared by many, many in the region, whether or not they express it publicly. Israel is not obliged by this agreement and Israel will do everything it needs to defend itself, to defend the security of its people,” affirmed Netanyahu.
Turning to seemingly address Kerry’s scathing critique Thursday night on Channel 2 of Israel’s West Bank policies, Netanyahu said: “I will never compromise on Israel’s security and our vital interests, not in the face of any international pressure. I think the pressure has to be put where it belongs, that is, on the Palestinians who refuse to budge. But I think in any case, no amount of pressure will make me or the government of Israel compromise on the basic security and national interests of the State of Israel. The people of Israel know this and they support it, as they should.”
A senior State Department official said that Kerry had been open to the possibility of traveling to Geneva for the talks “if it would help narrow differences.”
The official said the European Union’s top diplomat, Catherine Ashton, asked Kerry to attend the latest round of discussions. The official called the negotiations “a complex process” and said Kerry was “committed to doing anything he can” to help.
According to the Telegraph, the Iranian deal’s four main points were that Iran would stop enriching uranium to 20 percent and convert its existing stockpile into harmless uranium oxide. Iran would be able to continue enrichment to 3.5% purity necessary for nuclear power plants — but would agree to limit the number of centrifuges running for this purpose. The inactive centrifuges would be able to remain intact. Iran would also agree not to activate its plutonium reactor at Arak, which could provide an alternative route to a nuclear weapon, during the six-month period in which Iran will limit uranium enrichment to 3.5%. Lastly, Iran would agree not to use the advanced IR-2 centrifuges, which enrich uranium three to five times faster than the older model.
In return, the British paper reported, the US “would ease economic sanctions, possibly by releasing some Iranian foreign exchange reserves currently held in frozen accounts” and ease “some restrictions on Iran’s petrochemical, motor and precious metals industries.”
On Thursday night, Netanyahu said the proposals “on the table in Geneva” would “ease the pressure on Iran in return for ‘concessions’ that aren’t concessions at all.” He said Israel completely opposes these proposals, which would leave Iran with a capacity to build nuclear weapons.
“I believe that adopting [these proposals] would be a mistake of historic proportions. They must be rejected outright,” he said at a conference of Israeli and Diaspora leaders in Jerusalem Thursday.
Later, during a meeting with a US Congress delegation, Netanyahu angrily called the offer being discussed in Geneva the “deal of the century” for Iran.
Sanctions had brought Iran to the brink of economic collapse, and the P5+1 countries have the opportunity to force Iran to completely dismantle its nuclear weapons program, the prime minister said. “Anything less than that” would reduce the likelihood of a peaceful solution to the crisis, he said, and Israel would always reserve the right to protect itself against any threat.
In an interview with Israel’s Channel 2 Thursday, Kerry stressed the negotiators in Geneva were requiring Iran to “provide a complete freeze over where they are today.” He argued that it was “better” to be talking to Iran, and seeking to “expand” the time it would take Iran to break out to the bomb, than not to be talking to Iran, and have it continuing to advance its nuclear program. “We have not taken away any of the sanctions yet,” he said. “We will not undo the major sanctions regime until we have absolute clarity,” he said.
If Iran did not “meet the standards” required by the international community, Kerry said, it knew “worse sanctions” were in prospect, and even, as the “clock ticks down… there may be no option but the military option. We hope to avoid that.”
On Thursday, the White House said world powers negotiating with Iran are pursuing an agreement that would offer some sanctions relief if Tehran halts and possibly reverses parts of its nuclear program.
White House spokesman Jay Carney said the first step would deal with Iran’s most advanced nuclear activities.
Carney said that, in exchange, the world powers would consider targeted and limited sanctions relief. He said the relief would be reversible, and sanctions could even be tightened, if Iran breaks its word.
The meeting between Kerry and Netanyahu Friday took place a day after the secretary of state launched an unusually bitter public attack on Israeli policies in the West Bank, during an interview with Israel’s Channel 2, warning that if current peace talks fail, Israel could see a Third Intifada and growing international isolation, and that calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions would increase.
“The alternative to getting back to the talks is the potential of chaos,” Kerry said during the interview. “I mean, does Israel want a Third Intifada?” he asked. “Israel says, ‘Oh, we feel safe today, we have the wall. We’re not in a day-to-day conflict,’” said Kerry. “I’ve got news for you. Today’s status quo will not be tomorrow’s…” Israel’s neighbors, he warned, will “begin to push in a different way.”
“If we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis, if we do not find a way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of Israel, there will be an increasing campaign of delegitimization of Israel that’s been taking place on an international basis,” he went on.
Turning to settlements and Israel’s presence in the West Bank, he added: “If we do not resolve the question of settlements, and the question of who lives where and how and what rights they have; if we don’t end the presence of Israeli soldiers perpetually within the West Bank, then there will be an increasing feeling that if we cannot get peace with a leadership that is committed to nonviolence, you may wind up with a leadership that is committed to violence.”
Israel’s Channel 2 quoted an unnamed official in Jerusalem responding bitterly to the secretary’s remarks, saying Israel would not “succumb to fear tactics” by the secretary, and would not compromise on its vital security needs. The official also reportedly noted that Kerry’s comments would not “encourage” the Palestinians to compromise.
The Israeli official seemed to be angrily echoing Kerry’s own comments in connection with the Iranian nuclear program in late October, when he said that America “will not succumb to those fear tactics” — remarks interpreted by commentators as criticism of Israeli warnings about the dangers of talking to Tehran.
An agreement between the United States and Iran over the latter’s nuclear program seems imminent, but the charm offensive in Geneva is not mirrored at home. In Tehran, the Iranian government sent a different message with a broadcast on state television of a simulated missile attack on Israel.
The hour-long documentary program included segments about the capabilities of Iranian missiles and the possibility of their use in response to foreign threats. The program included a video simulation of a potential response by Iran to an Israeli strike on its nuclear facilities.
The video showed computer-animated launches of Iran’s long-range Sejjil ballistic missiles. The animations show Israel’s air defense systems intercepting a few missiles as others penetrate the protective layer and destroy different strategic targets across Israel.
Among the targets shown are the Azrieli Towers and the Kirya in Tel Aviv, the IDF base Tzfirin in central Israel, a generic missile launch site, Ben Gurion Airport, and the nuclear reactor at Dimona. The targets were circled on Google Maps, and the video finished with real pictures of casualties from the Second Lebanon War.
In 2012, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatened Israel with the destruction of Tel Aviv and Haifa – part of the usual rhetoric employed by the Islamic regime. “At times, the Zionist entity threatens a military attack, but they know that if they make the smallest mistake, the Islamic republic will obliterate Tel Aviv and Haifa.”
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments