WarSclerotic

Kerry bids from Abu Dhabi to break up unique broad front which tripped up US-Iran nuclear deal.

DEBKAfile Special Report November 11, 2013, 2:26 PM (IDT)

John Kerry in Geneva

The pushback against a nuclear deal between the six powers and Iran in Geneva Friday, Nov. 8 had many partners. Europe, Saudi Arabia, the Arab Emirates and Israel have bonded together against the Obama administration’s plans to mend US fences with Tehran in general and leave Iran with its nuclear components intact.
–
Secretary of State John Kerry landed in the United Arab Emirate Monday, Nov. 11, for an effort to break up that bond and split up the broad opposition to Barack Obama’s policy.  “President Obama is a man of his word,” Kerry declared. “He said in a speech before the UN that the US will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon and this is our policy to which we are committed. “
His assurance reminded his skeptical listeners of the credibility gap between Obama’s red line against Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons and his withdrawal from making good on that commitment by substituting a questionable deal with Moscow for military action.

They are also familiar with the terms of the US-Iranian nuclear deal and reject it out of hand.

Holding Binyamin Netanyahu, France and Saudi Arabia responsible for stalling the deal as the only “culprits” served two US administration purposes:
1. Rather than taking on a broad international front, the administration found it more convenient to focus on one of its members, Israel and its prime minister, as the responsible party for holding up the first concrete deal ever negotiated with Iran on its nuclear program.
2. Presenting Netanyahu as the party in the wrong and the cause of Israel’s isolation gave his political opponents ammunition for clobbering him.

Still, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry show no inclination to meet America’s allies’ widespread demands to tone down their proposal, which essentially permits Iran to retain all the components for assembling a nuclear bomb, while enjoying a generous reward in sanctions relief for a six-month freeze.

debkafile’s political sources report that in opposing this lopsided deal in Geneva, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius spoke on behalf of the other European powers present, Germany and Britain.

Even Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov presented an unusually low profile in Geneva, abstaining from words of support for the American position. Speaking on condition of anonymity, members of the Russian delegation agreed that the deal on the table was a bad one.

The front lining up against Obama’s bid for reconciliation with Iran, including a nuclear deal, also includes Saudi Arabia and the Arab Emirates, especially the UAE which has grown into a major economic and financial power.
Sunday, Netanyahu hit back at his misrepresentation as the lone spoiler by revealing his contacts with the European powers represented in Geneva and his close cooperation with the Arabian Gulf, including Saudi Arabia.

“The world should pay heed when Israel and the Arabs speak with one voice. It doesn’t happen that often,” he said.
debkafile’s Washington sources admit that the group effort by Jerusalem, Paris and Riyadh to defeat the Obama administration’s Iran policy was a groundbreaker. One source noted that it had attained the unheard-of level of coordinated Israeli-Arab-European teamwork for mobilizing individual US congressmen and senators against the deal with Iran and in favor of tighter sanctions.

Those sources also contradicted the administration’s claim that the Iranians backed away first from the draft accord prepared for the Geneva conference. They say the veto was ultimately slapped down by Kerry.

In urgent discussions in Washington on ways to salvage the nuclear negotiations from the Geneva flop – while keeping Iran in play – fingers were pointing at Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and EU foreign executive Catherine Ashton, who chaired the meeting.

According to those sources, the two diplomats put the draft before Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and allowed him to insert amendments. When that was done, they called the foreign ministers of the six powers and invited them to attend the signing ceremony.
Sherman and Ashton are quoted as telling them, “The cake is ready for putting in the oven to bake.”

Upon hearing this, the Secretary of State interrupted his talks in Israel Friday, Nov. 8, and took off for Geneva, certain that the deal with Iran was in the bag and would be signed that day.
He was aghast when he was shown the amended draft and understood that there was no way to sell this deal to the Europeans, the Arabs or Israel. He therefore applied the brakes to preparations for the signing ceremony and ordered a return to the table.

Meanwhile, the Iranians are moving on, certain that a deal with the powers is in the works. The UN nuclear watchdog (IAEA) director Yukiya Amano Monday, Nov. 11, announced the signing of a joint statement with Tehran. It opens the way for IAEA inspectors to visit the Arak construction site of Iran’s controversial heavy water reactor and the Gachin uranium mine.  “The practical measures will be implemented in the next three months, starting from today,” Amano told a news conference in Tehran, broadcast on state television.
This monitoring agreement was designed as a clause in the preliminary accord that was stalled before it was signed in Geneva last Friday.

▶ Netanyahu: I Won’t be Silenced on Israel’s Security – Nov.10, 2013 – YouTube.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu vowed on Sunday that he will always ensure the security of the State of Israel.

Speaking at the Jewish Federations of North America General Assembly, Netanyahu warned once again that the deal being made with Iran was dangerous. He also took a shot at U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who had hinted in an interview earlier that Netanyahu was not aware of the terms of the proposed deal.

Netanyahu responded to Kerry by saying, “I’m continuously updated in detail.”

“For decades we have been struggling mightily against a regime that calls for our destruction and it pursues nuclear weapons in order to achieve our destruction,” said Netanyahu.

The West, he added, “put together a sanctions regime that has brought Iran to its knees, crippling sanctions. The purpose of those sanctions was to get Iran to dismantle — dismantle — its nuclear enrichment capabilities, which are used for atomic bombs and its heavy water plutonium reactor, which is used for atomic bombs.

“This is what the sanctions are for,” said Netanyahu. “They’re not for preventing civilian nuclear energy or medical isotopes. I suppose Iran is building those ICBMs in order to launch medical isotopes to the Iranian patients orbiting the Earth. It is to prevent fissile material — that’s the material that you put inside an atomic bomb — that’s what those sanctions were about. To dismantle the centrifuge installations, underground military installations, centrifuge halls, and the plutonium reactor.

“Now there’s a deal. Why the Iranians came to deal is obvious: because the sanctions are biting, biting their economy, crippling that regime. So they came to the table because they have to. And what is being offered now, and I’m continuously updated in detail. I know whereof I speak. What is being proposed now is a deal in which Iran retains all of that capacity. Not one centrifuge is dismantled. Not one.”

Under the proposed deal, warned Netanyahu, “Iran gets to keep tons of low enriched uranium and they can take these centrifuges, which are not dismantled, in the halls, underground, which are not dismantled — using advanced centrifuges that they’ve already installed, some of them, that are not dismantled — and they can rush within a few weeks, maybe a couple of months, that’s all, and create at the time of their choosing, the fissile material for a bomb.

“Iran does not give up anything of that. It makes a minor concession that is meaningless in today’s technology and in their current capacities. In other words, none of the demands of the Security Council resolutions, which the P5+1 powers passed are met. None of them! But what is given to them is the beginning of the rollback of sanctions.

“This means that the sanctions that took years to put in place are beginning to rollback with several billions of dollars of assets that are freed up; the automotive industry contracts that is central to Iran’s economy freed up; petrochemical industry freed up; matters that involved gold and even petroleum revenues freed up some,” he said.

This deal, Netanyahu said, is “a bad deal. It’s a dangerous deal because it keeps Iran as a nuclear threshold nation and it may very well bring about a situation where the sanctions are dissolved or collapsed. It’s a bad and dangerous deal that deals with the thing that affects our survival. And when it comes to the question of Jewish survival and the survival of the Jewish s

The Israeli prime minister has repeatedly spoken out about his concerns over the U.S. negotiating with Iran. He argued that Iran got too much from the deal, as described to him by American sources, because it did not require them to dismantle a single centrifuge, and would set off a scramble among the international community to ease sanctions on the country. “Not a good idea, not a good deal. A very bad deal,” he said.

Former Defense Sec. Leon Panetta, also on “Face the Nation,” said it was appropriate for the U.S. to be wary of Iran’s intentions.

“We’ve got to be very skeptical,” Panetta said. “Iran is a country that has promoted terrorism. They’ve had a hidden enrichment facility that we had to find out about. So we’ve got to be skeptical and make sure that, even with some kind of interim agreement, that we know what the next steps are going to be in order to ensure that they really do stand by their word.”

“You better operate from a position of strength if you want to deal with the Iranians,” he added.

Any deal must question what will happen to enriched fuel that Iran already has, the country’s centrifuges, and heavy water reactors, Panetta said, and must address ensure that the country does not have any other hidden enrichment sites.

“The president and I share the goal of making sure that Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said of President Obama. “I think where we might have a difference of opinion is on how to prevent it.”
© 2013 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Israel, US hardliners applauded French for blocking nuclear deal – Israel News, Ynetnews.

French FM’s tough position on nuclear Iran during Geneva talks have earned him praise from hardliners, scorn from deal supporters. ‘Vive la France,’ Sen. John McCain tweeted as Iranian MKs slammed France’s support of ‘Zionist regime’

Ynet

Conservative leaders, fond of finger-pointing at France in recent years, lavished praise on Paris Sunday for blocking an agreement between Western powers and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program.

“Vive la France!” Republican Senator John McCain, an outspoken voice on national security issues, wrote on his Twitter account as reports emerged that a Jewish French MP warned Fabius of Israel’s intentions to attack Iran should it receive a soft deal.

“France had the courage to prevent a bad nuclear agreement with Iran,” McCain said, after the weekend announcement of the failed agreement with the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France and Germany, known as the P5+1, exemplifying the prevalent attitude towards the French in recent days.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius (Photo: AP)

Channel 2 News reported Sunday that Meyer Habib, a French member of parliament, telephoned French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius while talks were still taking place to warn him that he believes that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would order an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities if western powers did not stiffen their conditions for relieving sanctions.

“I know (Netanyahu)… If you don’t toughen your positions, Netanyahu will attack Iran,” Habib reportedly told Fabius. “I know this. I know him. You have to toughen your positions in order to prevent war,” he reportedly added.

During three days of intense negotiations in Geneva, France repeatedly voiced concerns over various points in a possible deal and its lack of guarantees, a position that had Iran calling it a negotiations spoiled sport.

On Monday Fabius said he was hopeful a deal could be reached, although Tehran still had to make an effort on a few points. “We are not far from an agreement with the Iranians, but we are not there yet,” Laurent Fabius told Europe 1 radio.

“Thank God for France and thank God for push back,” said hawkish Senor Lindsey Graham on CNN’s State of the Union program. “The French are becoming very good leaders in the Mideast,” Graham said, suggesting he would be in favor of more sanctions against Iran.

“My fear is that we’re going to wind up creating a North Korea-type situation in the Mideast, where we negotiate with Iran and one day you wake up…and you’re going to have a nuclear Iran,” Graham added.

Geneva nuclear talks (Photo: AP)

Immediately before news broke that the talks were expected to end without a deal, a Western diplomat close to the negotiations said the French were trying to upstage the other powers.

“The Americans, the EU and the Iranians have been working intensively together for months on this proposal, and this is nothing more than an attempt by Fabius to insert himself into relevance late in the negotiations,” the diplomat told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

During negotiations, Fabius said that “I cannot say there is any certainty that we can conclude” the talks, noting that France could not accept a “sucker’s deal” and that Israel’s “concerns” need to be taken into consideration.

‘The will of Zionist regime’

The comments, as well as his overall hard-line position towards Iran, prompted two senior Iranian MPs to accuse Fabius of defending Israel.

Hossein Naqavi Hosseini, spokesman of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, said “the behavior of the French representative in the nuclear talks shows that France is trying to blackmail” Iran.

“While the French people want better ties between Tehran and Paris, unfortunately the French government prefers the will of Zionist regime,” said Naqavi Hosseini.

Esmaeel Kosari, a fellow conservative and member of the committee, expressed regret that Fabius’s comments “express the positions of the Zionist (Israeli) regime, which prompts us to eye the talks with pessimism.”

And state news agency IRNA accused Fabius of “hindering” a deal between.

Israel’s relations with France have been marred by occasional hiccup. Just a few weeks ago the French president’s upcoming visit to Israel stirred a diplomatic firestorm when Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein decided to boycott the visit after Francois Hollande decided not to appear before the Knesset, Yedioth Ahronoth reported.

Hollande is expected to arrive in Israel in late November for a three-day state visit.

Shapiro: US won’t let Iran get nuclear weapons, nor sign a bad deal | JPost | Israel News.

By JPOST.COM STAFF

11/11/2013 11:28

Ambassador tells GA that US has ironclad commitment to Israel’s security; says Obama would not sign a ‘bad deal’ on Iran, nor waste the leverage provided by the economic sanctions on Tehran.

US Ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro vowed Monday that US President Barack Obama would not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, and that the United States would not sign on to a “bad deal” at negotiations with Iran tipped to restart later this month.

Speaking at the Jewish Federations of North American General Assembly in Jerusalem, Shapiro drove home his point by repeating it in Hebrew.

He said that the US would not “squander” the leverage yielded by the crippling economic sanctions on Iran, seen as key to Tehran’s decision attend talks with world powers held earlier this week in Geneva. Echoing comments made by Secretary of State John Kerry when he met with Prime MInister Binyamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem last week, Shapiro said that no deal on Iran’s atomic program would be better than a bad deal. The US, he added, would not agree to a bad deal.

He said the ties between Israel and the United States were as strong as ever, and pledged that Israel’s security was still of paramount importance to his country.

Shapiro told the attendees that the US had an “iron-clad commitment to Israel’s security”, and that the relationship between two countries was “as close as it has ever been.”

The subject of the world powers’ negotiations with Iran over its nuclear ambitions was also the central focus of Netanyahu’s remarks at the opening of the annual conference on Sunday night.

Netanyahu warned that Israel would not honor an agreement that did not meet its demands for Iran’s nuclear program to be dismantled, and that any roll-back of the sanctions imposed on Tehran would be a serious error, as they were what had driven Iran to the negotiating table in the first place.

Forward thinking | JPost | Israel News.

By YAA KOV LAPPIN

11/11/2013 12:26

The ‘Post’ military correspondent takes a look at the main security threats facing Israel

Overview The fast-changing Middle East region has led to a dramatic transformation in Israel’s security environment.

Conventional threats posed by hierarchical state armies, such as the armed forces of the Syrian regime, have all but vanished in the chaos sweeping the region, while unconventional rocket, missile and guerrilla terrorism threats to Israel have increased significantly

Zones suffering from failed state or partially failed state syndromes, such as 60 percent of Syria and parts of the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, provide fertile ground for the growth of al-Qaida-affiliated organizations bent on carrying out terrorist attacks and spreading their radical ideology.

On the other side of the spectrum is the Iran-led Shi’ite-Alawite axis, composed of the extremist Iranian regime and its extraterritorial special operations unit the Quds Force, Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime and Hezbollah. As radical Sunni forces confront the pro-Iranian axis, the resulting clash unleashes waves of violence and destabilization throughout the whole region.

In failed states like Syria and Libya, advanced weapons are raided from military storehouses and sold on the black market to terrorist organizations.

Yet, all of these threats are minor – and containable – when compared to the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear military program.

It is important to keep in mind that for every threat listed below, the IDF has developed a planned-out response, which it is refining continuously. The solutions provided by the IDF are too extensive to enumerate in this article, but are forward-thinking and designed to meet the challenges Israel expects to face in the 21st century.

Iran The Islamic Republic continues to represent the No. 1 threat to Israel’s security. Tehran has enriched enough low-grade uranium for seven to nine atomic bombs, if enriched to military-grade levels (a relatively straightforward process). It is continuing to enrich uranium to the intermediate 20% level at its facilities in Natanz and the subterranean site at Fordow, near Qom, while also pursuing a parallel track to nuclear weapons through plutonium at the heavy water reactor in Arak.

Iran is building an extensive long-range missile capability widely believed to have been designed to deliver nuclear warheads.

Iran’s regime is outspokenly dedicated to the goal of destroying the State of Israel. Iranian political, religious and military leaders have expressed their desire to annihilate Israel repeatedly.

Furthermore, the Iranian regime is filled with quarreling factions that could in the future lead to a destabilization of the government, the military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. In any future destabilization of an Iranian regime armed with atomic bombs, a hard-line faction could seize control of nuclear missile bases and order an attack.

Iran’s territory is 70 times larger than Israel, a disparity that will form a temptation for Iranian leaders to realize their fantasy of destroying Israel. Former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, considered an Iranian “reformist,” formulated this thinking when he said in 2001: “If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the… application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.”

With 70% of the Israeli population concentrated in cities on the Mediterranean Coastal Plain, Iranian leaders might face the temptation of initiating a nuclear attack based on Rafsanjani’s calculation. Israel has a population of 7.8 million; Iran has a population of 74.8 million.

Once Iran breaks through to the nuclear arms stage, it would automatically spark a Middle Eastern arms race, as Iran’s frightened Sunni rivals would rush to get their own atomic bombs. Sunni states suffering from chronic instability, such as Egypt, as well as other Sunni powers such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, would likely end up armed with nuclear weapons as well. This would create an intolerable security environment for all actors in the region.

The danger of nuclear terrorism will become tangible if Iran goes nuclear. With Iran sponsoring terrorist attacks throughout the entire region, from Iraq to Lebanon to Georgia, and with Iranian agents involved in attempted terrorist attacks in multiple continents, it would be impossible to rule out the possibility of nuclear terrorism if Tehran acquires the bomb.

Syria Until 2011, the Syrian military posed the most serious conventional military threat to Israeli territorial security.

Today, it is struggling to remain intact in the face of erosion caused by two-and-a-half years of fighting with the rebels. Syria’s inward focus and reduced capabilities have removed it from the list of major threats to Israel.

No Syrian tanks are threatening to invade the Golan Heights or the Galilee, and the Assad regime is keen on reserving its remaining missile capabilities for use in the civil war.

Nevertheless, within Syria, a number of new threats to Israeli security are rapidly developing. Syria has become a transit zone for advanced Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah. The more Assad relies on Iran and Hezbollah for his survival, the closer he grows to them, and he is now in no position to refuse any of their requests for the movement or transfer of sophisticated weaponry.

Israel has drawn clear red lines over the movement of advanced missiles, missile defense batteries and chemical weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Syrian battlegrounds are now filled with Hezbollah fighters and Iranian Quds Force military advisers. Although Iran and Hezbollah have moved military assets to Syria to take on the rebels, their presence also represents a potential new front from which they can also operate against Israel.

Meanwhile, in northern and eastern districts of Syria, where the Assad regime has lost all control, al-Qaida is quickly building up its principal Mideast base.

According to one study carried out by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, the Nusra Front, claimed by al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri as an official branch in Syria, is entrenching itself at a rate several times faster than the time it took al-Qaida in Afghanistan to become a serious international terrorist presence.

Groups like the Nusra Front are raiding Syrian army weapons depots and could one day get hold of chemical weapons as well – which would represent a major threat to Israel, and regional and global security.

Lebanon The flames of the sectarian civil war in Syria have begun to spread to Lebanon, Hezbollah’s home base. Despite being heavily involved in the Syrian conflict and losing hundreds of fighters, Hezbollah remains the most powerful military-terrorist entity in Lebanon.

It has amassed some 80,000 to 90,000 rockets and missiles, all of which are pointed at Israeli cities, and the Iranian- backed organization can strike at nearly every location in Israel.

This represents an unprecedented threat to the Israeli home front. Hezbollah has tens of thousands of welltrained fighters within its ranks.

The IDF has been training intensively and is drawing up plans to extinguish rocket fire from Lebanon in any future conflict with Hezbollah, while the IDF’s Home Front Command has been working to ensure the civilian population and infrastructure will be able to cope with large-scale rocket and missile attacks.

According to Israel’s assessment, Hezbollah, despite being heavily armed, is also deterred by Israel’s devastating firepower, and is focusing its efforts for the time being on guarding its status in Lebanon and helping its ally in Damascus survive the civil war.

Gaza The Hamas regime in Gaza is still licking its wounds from last year’s short but intense Operation Pillar of Defense. The conflict began when the IDF surprised Hamas by assassinating its military chief Ahmed Jabari, and launched an air campaign that targeted Hamas’s rocket infrastructure.

The Israeli move came in response to an ever-escalating Hamas campaign to attack Israeli forces patrolling the Gaza border, and to target southern Israeli cities with large rocket barrages when Israel responded to the border attacks.

Today, Hamas has amassed over 5,000 short-range rockets that can strike cities such as Ashkelon and Ashdod, and is in possession of intermediate-range projectiles that can hit Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Hamas’s rocket arsenal places 70% of the Israeli population within its range. It has some 16,000 fighters, while the smaller Iranian-sponsored Islamic Jihad in Gaza has about 5,000 armed members and 2,000 rockets.

Since the fall of its fellow Islamist government in Cairo, Hamas – which is a Muslim Brotherhood branch – has found itself completely isolated, with no regional allies in sight.

It is now attempting to rejoin Iran’s orbit, which it left last year due its support of the Sunni rebels in Syria, a move that angered Tehran.

Billions of dollars in Qatari aid have arrived in Gaza for construction purposes, and Hamas seems keen to preserve the cease-fire with Israel to avoid inflicting further damage to its capabilities. A new conflict could also put the regime under intense public pressure from the Gazan civilian population, which may be in no mood for another round of fighting.

West Bank The West Bank sector saw a relative upsurge of violence in late September, when two IDF soldiers were killed in separate terrorist attacks. Nevertheless, the IDF believes that the chances of a third intifada breaking out here remain slim, due to a host of factors. These include Israel’s tight intelligence grip, the presence of the IDF in various strategic points on the ground, nightly counter-terrorism raids to break up cells and cooperation with the Palestinian Authority’s security services.

The PA has a vested interest in preventing Hamas and Islamic Jihad from stoking up more violence and undermining Fatah’s rule.

Nevertheless, violent disturbances, Molotov cocktail attacks, rock throwing, and gun and bomb attacks on Israeli military and civilian targets remain a constant threat in the West Bank.

The sector is also the scene of ongoing attempts by Hamas and other terror organizations to launch atrocities on civilian targets in Israel proper. One recent example is the plot by Hamas in the West Bank to bomb the Mamilla open-air mall in the heart of Jerusalem on the Jewish New Year, which was thwarted by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), the country’s domestic intelligence body.

Sinai In recent months, Egyptian security forces have stepped up counter-terrorism operations on the growing al-Qaida presence in the Sinai Peninsula.

Jihadis from this region have targeted the Red Sea resort of Eilat with rocket attacks on multiple occasions, and forced the shutdown of Eilat’s airport as well.

With access to Libyan missiles and firearms, the Sinai jihadis, made up of radicalized Beduin and foreign volunteers from Arab countries, have also launched cross-border attacks on the Israeli-Egyptian border, most likely in the hope of provoking an incident that would undermine the Israel-Egypt peace treaty.

The radical groups include Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, which claimed responsibility for rocket attacks on Eilat.

▶ Made in Israel — Technology – YouTube.

A break from the US selling out to Iran, here’s something to smile about….

–

Kerry: Iran, not France, scuttled nuclear deal | The Times of Israel.

Washington denies daylight with Paris over terms of agreement, moves to reassure Israel, Arab world of commitment to their security

By Spencer Ho November 11, 2013, 11:43 am

US Secretary of State John Kerry during a meeting at at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem on November 6. (photo credit: Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

American officials on Monday scrambled to clarify that that there were no differences between the US and France regarding the desired terms for an interim deal on Iran’s nuclear program, and to assure Israel that its security needs would not be compromised by such an agreement with Tehran.

“The French signed off on it, we signed off on it,” Secretary of State John Kerry said, referring to reports that the French had scuttled an agreement with Iran in Geneva over the weekend. On the contrary, he continued, the P5+1 nations presented a unified front versus the Iranian delegation, and it was Iran that could not accept the deal “at that particular moment.”

Kerry batted away acerbic criticism of the proposed agreement from Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that the Israeli prime minister “needs to recognize that no agreement” with Iran had been reached and that his opposition was premature. “The time to oppose [a deal] is when you see what it is,” he said.

The secretary of state was in Abu Dhabi, part of a tour of the Arab world during which he has been explaining the American position to Sunni alies who, like Israel, have been exhibiting growing concern over the prospect of an agreement with Iran. He said that US would defend its allies in the region against any aggression from Iran.

Dan Shapiro, the American ambassador to Israel, also attempted to mollify Israeli qualms over diplomacy with Tehran.

Addressing a plenary session of the Jewish Federations of North America General Assembly in Jerusalem, Shapiro stressed the United States’ and US President Barack Obama’s commitment to Israel’s security, calling the alliance between the two countries “as close as it has ever been.” He said that both countries shared the goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear program.

“There is no greater priority for the United States and Israel than preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,” Shapiro said. “On this issue the United Stated and Israel share an identical objective. [Obama] will not permit Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, period.”

President Shimon Peres, who also spoke at the GA Monday, downplayed reports of divisions between the US and Israel regarding negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program, and expressed confidence in the US’s handling of the issue.

“The United States is our best friend, and the friendship of the United States to us is deep and meaningful,” Peres said. “[Obama] committed himself not to permit the Iranians to become a nuclear power, not just for the sake of Israel but for the sake of humanity.”

Peres’s and Shapiro’s comments contrast with recent speeches by Netanyahu, in which he called a recent deal proposed by the US regarding Iran’s nuclear program “a bad deal.”

“What is being proposed now is a deal in which Iran retains all of that capacity” to build a nuclear weapon, Netanyahu told the GA Sunday. “Not one centrifuge is dismantled; not one. Iran gets to keep tons of low enriched uranium.”

Earlier Monday, the French foreign minister said he was optimistic about a deal with Iran in the coming weeks, but indicated that Tehran still had to make some concessions.

“We are not far from an agreement with the Iranians, but we are not there yet,” Laurent Fabius told Europe 1 radio, according to Reuters.

He also refuted suggestions by some diplomats that France was putting on a show by torpedoing a deal over the weekend, saying his country was merely acting on its own foreign policy objectives.

Iran and world powers were reportedly on the verge of a landmark deal on Iran’s nuclear program Saturday night, but the negotiations fell apart at the last minute, reportedly due to objections by France to the proposed agreement. The sides are to meet again on November 20.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladmir Putin called Saudi King Abdullah to clear the air over recent tensions between the two countries stemming from Moscow’s support for Iran’s nuclear ambitions and for beleaguered Syrian President Bashar Assad, AFP reported.

Despite their differences, the leaders “expressed a mutual interest in furthering (their) cooperation and maintaining contacts at various levels,” the Kremlin said.

Tensions between the two countries came to a head earlier this month when Riyadh rejected a seat on the UN Security Council due to the body’s inability to solve the crisis in Syria, and Russia, a permanent member of the body, responded with sharp criticism.

AP and JTA contributed to this report.

US official leaves Israel without understanding on Iran | The Times of Israel.

Wendy Sherman was in Jerusalem to brief Israelis on substance of talks with Tehran, smooth out disagreements

By Times of Israel staff November 11, 2013, 6:55 am

Wendy Sherman (photo credit: CC-BY dbking, Flickr)

The small US delegation led by Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman that arrived in Israel Sunday for meetings with senior government officials on the recent round of Western negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, left Israel overnight Sunday-Monday without reaching an understanding with Jerusalem on an emerging deal with Tehran, Army Radio reported early Monday morning.

Earlier, a senior American official who is intimately familiar with the talks in Jerusalem said that the disagreement between the United States and Israel is tactical in nature and Washington remains committed to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, trying to assuage fears that Washington might back a deal that would compromise Israel’s security.

Briefing Israeli journalists in a Jerusalem hotel, the American official said that even after limited sanctions relief in the framework of an interim deal, as proposed by the West, Iran’s economy would continue to deteriorate. The official also said it wasn’t the French but the Iranians who had rejected a temporary deal Saturday in Geneva, contrary to previous reports.

“The United States and Israel have worked very closely and consulted often, in the way to proceed forward — some days we may disagree on tactics,” the senior official said. “But we absolutely agree on the objective and we absolutely agree that we need a comprehensive agreement and we hope to get one very soon.”

Sherman, the third-highest official in the US State Department, served as head of the US delegation to the talks in Geneva over the weekend, conducted between Iran and the P5+1 powers (the five members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) over Iran’s nuclear program.

Accompanied by State Department officials, Sherman met with Israeli National Security Adviser Yossi Cohen and other senior officials from the Foreign Ministry and security establishment. She did not meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“She will be consulting with Government of Israel counterparts about the P5+1 negotiations in Geneva, and continuing our close coordination with Israel about our ongoing efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” an American official said before the talks.

Netanyahu on Sunday continued his campaign against a deal on Iran’s nuclear program and his war of words with US Secretary John Kerry Sunday night, this time at the Jewish Federations’ General Assembly in Jerusalem.

“What is being offered now, and I’m continuously updated in detail,” he said — it was an allusion to Kerry’s assertion earlier in the day that Netanyahu may not be aware of the terms of the proposed deal — “What is being proposed now is a deal in which Iran retains all” of its uranium enrichment capacity.

Despite reported progress, the latest round of discussions, conducted over the weekend in Geneva, ended without a deal after a proposed agreement was questioned by France. The sides are to meet again on November 20. Netanyahu has been bitterly critical of the emerging deal, and on Friday publicly urged Kerry not to sign it.

In an interview with Channel 10 last week, Sherman said the US would inform and consult with Israel about any nuclear deal world powers arrive at with Iran before it is carried out, because the Jewish state’s security is paramount.

“Whatever agreement we reach Israel will know about, understand and consulted with us on, because Israel’s security is bedrock and there is no closer security relationship than what we have with each other,” she said.

Israel has strongly opposed any deal that would leave Iran with the capability to quickly construct a nuclear weapon, leading Netanyahu and other officials to publicly come out against what they saw as a flawed potential agreement over the weekend.

Israeli official: US wants to sign Iran deal to avoid strike – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Sources in Jerusalem confirm that nuclear deal with Iran is, as Netanyahu noted, bad deal, which the US will only sign ‘because they fear the only alternative left – sans deal – is a strike.’ Reports reveal that Israel is not only nation to oppose deal

Attila Somfalvi

A senior Israeli official addressed on Sunday the nuclear talks between Iran and the West, saying “The Americans are anxious to sign a bad deal because they fear the only alternative left – sans deal – is a strike.”

“The deal really is bad,” the official added. “There’s no doubt that if they sign now, Iran will turn into a threshold state and there won’t be any deal that could stop Iran from developing its nuclear plan.”

World powers are to meet Iranians on November 20, to renew the talks. “We’ve realized they need more time,” a senior US official said. We understand Prime Minister Netanyahu, who takes care of Israel’s defense interests.”

Following reported progression in nuclear deal with Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stressed that Israel was not the only country that was against the impending deal.

“There are many, many Arab leaders in the region who are saying this is a very bad deal for the region and the world,” Netanyahu said. “You know, when you have the Arabs and Israelis speaking in one voice, it doesn’t happen very often; I think it’s worth paying attention to us.”

According to reports, nuclear negotiators have indeed been facing resistance from both Israel and Gulf states toward any pact that keeps Iran’s nuclear program generally intact.

It is unlikely that critics could derail international efforts to ease one of the Middle East’s most far-reaching standoffs, which has brought Israeli threats of military action, past warnings by Iran it could block critical oil tanker shipping lanes in retaliation for sanctions and opened rare public discord between the US and Saudi Arabia.

Netanyahu said Friday that he “utterly rejects” any emerging nuclear deal between Western powers and Iran, and pledged that Israel would do what was needed to defend itself – a clear reference to past warnings of military action to degrade Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Gulf states

Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states consider Iran as their chief rival in the region and – in a rare alignment of views – side closely with Israel’s outlook that Iran should be stripped of its ability to enrich uranium.

For years, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah repeatedly urged the United States to “cut off the head of the snake” by attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. Now, Saudi officials are dismayed over Washington’s efforts to end the 34-year diplomatic estrangement with Tehran.

Gulf states are major buyers of advanced US military equipment, but Saudi Arabia has hinted it could one day build closer strategic ties with nuclear-armed Pakistan as a way to guarantee its own de facto nuclear weapon status to counterbalance Iran. Washington, which has often said it fears an atomic arms race in the Gulf, would certainly oppose such an alliance.

But Saudi relations with the US have reached a difficult juncture. Saudi officials have openly criticized US President Barack Obama for his outreach to the new Iranian president. Last month, Saudi Arabia rejected a seat on the UN Security Council to reinforce its protest the US-Iranian diplomatic exchanges and the US decision to pull back from possible military strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad‘s forces and instead back a Russian-drafted plan to collect and destroy Assad’s chemical weapons supply. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are key backers of rebels seeking to topple Assad.

Iranian hard-liners

Opposition to nuclear agreements can also be seen from within the Islamic republic. Last month, banners began appearing around Tehran that depicted the US as a manipulative and bullying negotiating partner seeking to undermine Iran any way it can. No group claimed ownership of the messages, but that was unnecessary in a country where it’s already clear the forces that are lining up against any deals that could somehow close the diplomatic chasm with Washington.

Hard-liners led by the powerful Revolutionary Guard and its vast network of backers have strongly opposed the stirrings of rapprochement started by Iranian President Hassan Rohani. Last Monday, they organized the largest anti-American demonstration in years to mark the anniversary of the 1979 takeover the US Embassy after the Islamic Revolution.

The dissent, though, has its limits.

Rouani’s critics are not likely to stand in the way of a possible nuclear deal with the West since the negotiations have the support of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Also, the public largely supports bids to ease sanctions and even hard-liners do not want to be on the wrong side of that issue.

Syrian oposition

Rebels fighting to topple Assad remain divided on whether a nuclear deal would benefit or hurt their cause.

For many, an easing of Western pressure on Iran means Tehran would have a freer hand in the region. Nizar al-Hrakey, a member of the Syrian National Coalition and the group’s representative in Qatar, compared it to the Russian-US deal to try to rid Syria of its chemical weapons stockpile rather than carry out military strikes.

However, Kamal Labwani, a veteran Syrian opposition figure, said Iranian concessions to the West mean “total surrender,” adding he hoped it would lead to a more sidelined role for Iran in Syria.

Roi Kais, AP contributed to this report

Candidly Speaking: No illusions concerning the Obama administration | JPost | Israel News.

By ISI LEIBLER

11/10/2013 22:09

Israel is heading for what could be its most severe confrontation with the US, despite reassuring words from the Obama administration to the contrary.

Israel is heading for what could be its most severe confrontation with the United States, despite reassuring words from the Obama administration to the contrary.

President Barack Obama’s policies have led to a US retreat at all levels in the global arena, particularly in the Middle East where his disastrous policy of “engaging” with rogue states coincided with alienating, even abandoning, traditional US allies like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

His administration has also totally failed to mitigate the rampant bloodshed, with hundreds of civilians being killed daily in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere in the Arab world.

However, despite all evidence to the contrary, the administration persists in its mantra that the principal problem in the Middle East is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and displays a determination to impose a settlement on Israelis and Palestinians. It does so – even setting aside the problem of Hamas – despite the fact that the undemocratic Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose term expired years ago, is neither willing nor has the authority to make any meaningful concessions to Israel.

The US chooses to disregard to the extreme intransigence of the Palestinians and the massive ongoing incitement by the PA against Israel and continues to pressure the Israelis, their only regional democratic ally, to make additional unilateral concessions, many of which have long-term negative security implications for the future viability of the Jewish state.

US Secretary of State John Kerry presents himself as a “friend” of Israel. Yet his offensive off-the-cuff remarks not only depict him as somewhat of a buffoon, but demonstrate that he now openly sides against Israel in the confrontation with the Palestinians.

He utterly failed to act as an honest broker in his November 6 joint interview with Israel’s Channel 2 News and PA TV, when he targeted Israel for criticism and failed to even relate to Palestinian intransigence.

He provocatively asked “whether it [Israel] wanted a third intifada,” which he declared would eventuate if the talks failed. He warned that the Palestinians would “wind up with a leadership committed to violence.”

Following a meeting in Bethlehem with President Abbas, brushing aside the venomous incitement to hatred manifested daily by the PA, Kerry stated unequivocally that “President Abbas is 100% committed to these talks.”

He reiterated that the US considers construction in settlements, including Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem, to be “illegitimate,” and went so far as to state that Israel was sending “a message that perhaps you are not really serious.”

He never even referred to the PA demand that Palestinian refugees and their 5 million descendants be given the right of return to Israel. He refused to confront the Palestinian leadership over their refusal to reconcile themselves with the reality of Israel as sovereign Jewish entity.

There have been hints, subsequently denied, that if progress was not achieved by 2014, the US would propose bridging proposals – an ominous signal to Israel.

Kerry also threatened that if Israel could not find an accommodation, the US would not be able to deter the rest of the world from imposing real sanctions against Israel.

Such remarks effectively guarantee Palestinian intransigence by declaring that after the talks collapse, the world will in any event seek to impose a solution on Israel and shall not blame the Palestinians for once again reverting to terrorism.

And this is following Israel’s capitulation to intense American pressure resulting in the outrageous release of Palestinian mass murderers who were subsequently glorified by the Palestinians as heroes.

These statements by Kerry parallel other negative vibes from the US: Obama’s failure to condemn Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s provocative anti-Semitic remarks and the repudiation of his commitment to set aside the confrontation with Israel after Netanyahu had been pressured to apologize to him; the US effort to divert attention from its cyber-attacks on the French government’s communications network by hinting that the Israeli Mossad was to blame; and, most damaging of all, despite deliberate Israeli silence over the issue, the formal US announcement that Israel was responsible for bombing the Syrian military base in which missiles en route to Hezbollah were located. That is not how one treats an ally.

Over the past few months, there has been immense pressure directed at Israel and American Jews to ease up on Iran. Although accused of seeking to sabotage American diplomacy with the “moderate” President Hassan Rohani, Netanyahu has never challenged the role of diplomacy. He merely reminded the Americans of the proven duplicity of the Iranians and Rohani himself as he engages in protracted negotiations while proceeding to advance Iran nuclear status.

On the basis of Obama’s recent track record, Israelis were increasingly skeptical as to the fulfillment of his repeated commitment to employ military force if necessary to prevent the Iranians from becoming a nuclear power.

These concerns were confirmed when, despite repeated assurances by Kerry that “no deal is better than a bad deal,” the US and the Europeans (other than France) demonstrated a willingness despite all evidence to the contrary to ease the sanctions on the Iranians without receiving anything tangible in return.

Clearly, the US administration lied when it promised to brief Israelis in advance of any deal, so as not to surprise them, and gave repeated reassurances that short of an agreement by the Iranians to end their nuclear objectives, no partial deal was contemplated.

A shocked and distraught Netanyahu publicly admonished Kerry for making a “monumental mistake,” accusing him of providing the Iranians with “the deal of the century” and “in no way reducing their nuclear enrichment capability.”

Netanyahu stated that under such circumstances, Israel did not consider itself bound by any agreement between Tehran and the six world powers and “will do everything it considers necessary to defend itself and the security of its people.” There is of course the outside possibility that by the time the talks resume next week, Netanyahu’s warnings are heeded and a Munich-like capitulation is averted. But we should be under no illusions.

The next three months will be seriously challenging for Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu will need to marshal all his resources and seek to salvage what he can of the likely capitulation to the Iranian mullahs in a deal which in no way guarantees that the centrifuges will not soon again resume spinning.

In addition, Israel must resist American pressures to make further concessions to the Palestinians which may well have devastating repercussions our future security.

To confront these threats, it is imperative that the prime minister devise a strategic plan, engaging the broadest possible coalition, providing a united front, and work closely with the American Jewish community and other pro-Israel groups to orchestrate a major campaign to enlighten the American public and seek congressional support to rein in the appeasers.

For American Jews, this will be a real test of their commitment to the security of the Jewish state. There have been conflicting reports that leading Jewish organizations and representatives of the administration had agreed to defer for two months efforts to intensify sanctions on Iran, but this was adamantly denied by AIPAC and AJC spokesmen.

Regrettably, American Jews committed to the security of the Jewish state appear to be heading toward a direct confrontation with an administration willing to diplomatically abandon Israel and appease the most lethal global terrorist state.

ADL head Abe Foxman predicted that Kerry’s “outrageous behavior” and his “chutzpah” in lecturing Israel about peace would unite the American Jewish community. The question is will they have the courage to stand up and be counted?

The writer’s website can be viewed at http://www.wordfromjerusalem.com.
He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com