US President Joe Biden intends to visit Jerusalem, probably at the end of June. The reasons for the visit are many, but regardless of the American interests, which must be taken into account, Israel must prepare for the visit in order to advance its goals. Or in advanced weapon systems.
Recently, the National Security Adviser and the head of the National Security Council, Dr. Eyal Hulta, visited Washington and met with his counterpart.
The discussions he conducted there dealt with the expected president's visit to Iran, the security situation in Jerusalem, Gaza, Syria and Lebanon, cooperation between Israel and the United States, and probably also on Russia and China.
Negotiations to return to the nuclear deal are currently in a kind of halt / freeze, with no set and agreed-upon timetable for the future, but the American team, led by Rob Mali, and the European team, led by Minister Joseph Burrell, are looking for creative and angular ways to "quarter the circle." .
The Russian representative Ulyanov was interviewed at the time, days before the expected signing of the agreement, and boasted that under his leadership and with the help of China, the Iranians are getting a much better agreement than they would have hoped for.
Unfortunately, at the last minute an order came from Moscow to exclude from trade with Iran the economic sanctions imposed on Russia due to the invasion of Ukraine.
Although the demand has since been resolved, it caused the talks to end at the time.
Russia has not been alone, and what is still hampering the ability to sign a new nuclear deal is Iran's demand to remove the Revolutionary Guards from the list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), after their other extortionate demands were met in the affirmative.
The Iranians, meanwhile, reject any counter-proposal, which does not include removing the organization as a whole from the same blacklist.
Although the contacts are officially frozen, but because all parties are interested in an agreement, there is a fear in Israel and the Gulf that a "creative way to quarter the circle" will be found.
Minister Burrell flew to Tehran to look for a way to such a "surrender", after declaring a dead end in his talks with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken.
Even if an agreement is signed until Biden visits Israel, or not, the nuclear issue will occupy a central place in policy talks, alongside Iran's aggressive behavior and support for terrorism.
Russia, China and the peace process will come up in talks, but Israel must make sure that the treatment of Iran will capture most of the talk during its visit.
Dr. Eyal Hulta, Photo: AFP
Rob Mali, Photo: AFP
***
It is therefore important to present at this point in time the shortcomings and dangers of the agreement that has been formulated, and to propose steps that Israel will take if the agreement is signed or not (in aspiration, together with the United States and its partners).
The agreement reached is based on the worst agreement of 2015 and includes further concessions to the Iranians.
It does not take into account the time that has elapsed since 2015 and the short time left for its end and the expiration of restrictions on Iran.
He also does not take into account new findings, whether it is the nuclear archive that the Mossad brought in 2018 or whether it is the IAEA's findings on the Iranian violations that have been discovered at several sites.
The new agreement will allow Iran a secure attainment of nuclear state status and a bomb in the coming years, which will result in a change in the global balance of power and an extensive nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
There are no tools and levers in the agreement that will force the Iranians to negotiate a "longer and stronger" agreement, as Biden promised and as proponents of returning intentionally mistakenly distribute.
The restrictions will expire according to the original schedule, and by 2025 the powers will lose the snap-back mechanism that allows sanctions to be reactivated. There will be no mechanism left under pressure on the Iranians, who will receive hundreds of billions in assets upon signing.
The agreement does not address the oversight of activities related to the development of the weapons system, beyond the meager portion included in section T of the original agreement.
Apparently the secret agreement between the Russians, the Iranians and the Americans not to enforce this clause, which was included in the agreement under Israeli pressure, is still valid.
The new agreement may include additional confidential agreements and additional party agreements.
The future of the IAEA's open investigations is also still unclear.
Baiden and his staff will be comfortable continuing in the current situation until November, when the midterm elections will be held in the United States.
Iranian nuclear center in Isfahan, Photo: IP
***
Examining the alternatives poses two main alternatives, the choice between which is clear.
Under the bad deal, the Iranians will surely reach an industrial enrichment capability, based on advanced centrifuges and the transfer of a tiny portion of the uranium (which will be legitimately enriched) to military enrichment and the accumulation of enough material for the bomb.
Reaching the status of a threshold state and a bomb will take place at a slow pace, but Iran will be stronger and perceived as a country that has complied with agreements it has signed.
However, without an agreement, Iran will try to reach the bomb faster, but will do so from a position of weakness and without legitimacy.
Israel, and aspirations to the United States as well, will have legitimacy, urgency, relevance, and appropriate goals for critical harm.
In the equation of legitimacy + relevance + urgency + partnership versus "buying time" to build capabilities, which would come at the expense of the danger of Iran advancing to a point of no return, it is clear what the right path is.
Therefore, Israel must hear from Baidan during his visit a promise to maintain full freedom of action and increase cooperation in the fight against Iran in all dimensions.
Israel must build a delegitimization campaign to weaken Iran in all possible ways - economically, politically, militarily, politically, cyber-attacks, building kinetic tools, soft and legal tools, and more.
For this purpose, appropriate budgets and manpower must be invested.
It must be clear to Iran's leaders that the era in which the octopus' head remains immune has ended, while he is sending envoys to attack and undermine regional stability.
Along with the operational plans, a strategic communications plan must be built that will include messages about Iranian behavior and the dangers expected from a nuclear Iran, and that will emphasize the direct threat to the US and Europe once Iran completes development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.
***
The United States was about to sign a shameful and dangerous "surrender agreement", and is still willing to do so under certain conditions. More".
In order to achieve this one must not succumb to Iranian demands, but return to a plan of maximum pressure, alongside building a credible military threat to the regime and its survival.
If the threat does not affect Iranian behavior, one must be seriously prepared to use it in a broad international coalition.
Brigadier General (Res.) Prof. Yaakov Nagel is a Senior Fellow in the FDD and a visiting professor in the Faculty of Aeronautics and Space at the Technion.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us